FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C., May 6, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission charged four individuals with ties to a New York City brokerage firm in a scheme involving millions of dollars in illicit bribes paid to a high-ranking Venezuelan finance official to secure the bond trading business of a state-owned Venezuelan bank.
According to the SEC's complaint filed in federal court in Manhattan, the global markets group at broker-dealer Direct Access Partners (DAP) executed fixed income trades for customers in foreign sovereign debt. DAP Global generated more than $66 million in revenue for DAP from transaction fees - in the form of markups and markdowns - on riskless principal trade executions in Venezuelan sovereign or state-sponsored bonds for Banco de Desarrollo Económico y Social de Venezuela (BANDES). A portion of this revenue was illicitly paid to BANDES Vice President of Finance, María de los Ángeles González de Hernandez, who authorized the fraudulent trades.
"These traders triggered a fraud that was staggering in audacity and scope," said Andrew M. Calamari, Director of the SEC's New York Regional Office. "They thought they covered their tracks by using offshore accounts and a shadow accounting system to monitor their illicit profits and bribes, but they underestimated the SEC's tenacity in piecing the scheme together."
The SEC's complaint charges the following individuals for the roles in the kickback scheme:
Tomas Alberto Clarke Bethancourt, who lives in Miami and is an executive vice president at DAP. Known as "Tomas Clarke," he was responsible for executing the fraudulent trades and maintaining spreadsheets tracking the illicit markups and markdowns on those trades.
Iuri Rodolfo Bethancourt, who lives in Panama and received more than $20 million in fraudulent proceeds from DAP via his Panamanian shell company, which then paid Gonzalez a portion of this amount.
Jose Alejandro Hurtado, who lives in Miami and served as the intermediary between DAP and Gonzalez. Hurtado was paid more than $6 million in kickbacks disguised as salary payments from DAP, and he remitted some of that money to Gonzalez.
Haydee Leticia Pabon, who is Hurtado's wife and received approximately $8 million in markups or markdowns on BANDES trades that were funneled to her from DAP in the form of sham finders' fees.
In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced criminal charges against Gonzalez as well as Clarke and Hurtado.
According to the SEC's complaint, the scheme began in October 2008 and continued until at least June 2010. BANDES was a new customer to DAP brought in by DAP Global executives through their connections to Hurtado. As a result of the kickbacks to Gonzalez, DAP obtained BANDES' lucrative trading business and provided Gonzalez with the incentive to enter into trades with DAP at considerable markups or markdowns without regard to the prices paid by BANDES. Gonzalez used her senior role at the Caracas-based bank to ensure that its bond trades would continue to be steered to DAP. As the scheme evolved over time, the traders deceived DAP's clearing brokers, executed internal wash trades, inter-positioned another broker-dealer in the trades to conceal their role in the transactions, and engaged in massive roundtrip trades to pad their revenue.
For example, the SEC alleges that in January 2010, the traders and Gonzalez arranged for two fraudulent roundtrip trades with BANDES as both buyer and seller. These trades - which lacked any legitimate business purpose - caused BANDES to pay DAP more than $10 million in fees, a portion of which was diverted to Gonzalez for authorizing the blatantly fraudulent trades.
The SEC further alleges that, giving rise to the adage of no honor among thieves, Clarke and Hurtado frequently falsified the size of DAP's fees in their reports to Gonzalez, which enabled the traders to retain a greater share of the fraudulent profits.
The SEC's complaint charges Clarke, Bethancourt, Hurtado, and Pabon with fraud and seeks final judgments that would require them to return ill-gotten gains with interest and pay financial penalties.
The SEC's investigation, which is continuing, was conducted by Wendy Tepperman, Amanda Straub, and Michael Osnato of the New York Regional Office. The SEC's litigation will be led by Howard Fischer. An SEC examination of DAP that that led to the investigation was conducted by members of the New York office's broker-dealer examination staff. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
FROM: U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
May 6, 2013
CFTC Charges Bostonian David Prescott with Forex Pool Fraud
Court enters order freezing Defendant’s assets and protecting books and records
Washington, DC - The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today announced that on May 3, 2013, the Honorable C.N. Clevert, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin issued an Order freezing the assets of Defendant David Prescott, individually and doing business as Cambridge Currency Partners (Prescott). The court’s Order also prohibits the destruction of books and records and sets a telephonic status hearing for May 15, 2013.
The court’s Order stems from a CFTC civil Complaint filed on April 30, 2013, charging Prescott with fraudulently soliciting individuals to invest in Cambridge’s off-exchange foreign currency (forex) pool and then misappropriating their monies. According to the Complaint, from at least June 2010 to the present, Prescott misappropriated at least $455,000 of pool participants’ monies, using some of those funds for air travel, hotel accommodations, and gambling. The Complaint also alleges that Prescott defrauded pool participants and prospective pool participants by misrepresenting the risks involved in forex trading and executing demand promissory notes in their favor that promised the repayment of the note amount and monthly interest payments, knowing or recklessly disregarding that he could not make those payments by his forex trading.
Additionally, the Complaint alleges that Prescott failed to inform participants and prospective participants that under the name of David Weeks, he previously had been convicted of conspiracy to commit securities fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud, and perjury, and had been ordered to pay restitution of over $1 million to defrauded investors and was permanently enjoined from violating the anti-fraud provisions of the Securities Exchange Act.
The Complaint also charges Prescott with engaging in the alleged misconduct without the benefit of registration as a Commodity Pool Operator.
In the continuing litigation, the CFTC is seeking repayment of pool participants’ losses, repayment of funds received by the Defendant, civil monetary penalties, and permanent injunctions prohibiting the Defendant from violating the federal commodity laws and from engaging in further trading.
The CFTC appreciates the assistance of the Milwaukee, Wisconsin, office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The following CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members are responsible for this case: Diane M. Romaniuk, Mary Elizabeth Spear, Ava M. Gould, Scott R. Williamson, Rosemary Hollinger and Richard B. Wagner.
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Court Orders Former Hedge Fund Manager Gad Grieve and Firm to Pay Over $26 Million in Disgorgement and Penalties
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that, on April 26, 2013, the Honorable Alvin K. Hellerstein, U.S. District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York, entered final judgments against former New York-based hedge fund manager Grant Ivan (Gad) Grieve and his Finvest advisory firms, ordering them to jointly and severally pay disgorgement of $14,164,780 and civil penalties in the amount of $12,192,302.
The final judgments stem from a civil injunctive action that the Commission filed on February 10, 2009. The SEC’s complaint alleged that defendants Grieve and Finvest fabricated and disseminated false financial information for their Finvest Primer hedge fund that was "certified" by a sham back-office administrator and phony auditing firm that Grieve himself created. The complaint also alleged that Grieve and Finvest provided current and prospective investors in the Finvest Primer and Finvest Yankee hedge funds with false monthly account statements, newsletters, and fact sheets that materially overstated the funds’ performance and assets. According to the Commission, beginning in late 2008, Grieve engaged in similar misconduct overseas, including luring new investors and placating existing investors with counterfeit documents.
The Commission charged Grieve and the Finvest firms with violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Section 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder. On January 26, 2010, Judge Hellerstein entered a default judgment against Grieve, enjoining him from future violations of these provisions and ordering disgorgement and civil penalties with amounts to be determined in later proceedings. The Court entered similar judgments for monetary relief against the Finvest firms on April 23, 2010.
On July 29, 2010, following SEC administrative proceedings, Grieve was barred by default from association with any investment adviser.
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission settled fraud charges against Eric R. Nelson and Kevin J. Wilcox, and obtained a default judgment against Jennifer E. Thoennes, arising from their alleged participation in a Ponzi scheme operated by Joseph Nelson. The relief obtained concludes the litigation in SEC v. Wilcox.
On December 29, 2011, the Commission charged Eric Nelson, Wilcox, and Thoennes with aiding and abetting Joseph Nelson’s Ponzi scheme, which raised at least $16 million from more than 100 people to invest in promissory notes issued by Joseph Nelson’s companies during 2007 through July 2010. Among other conduct, the Complaint alleged that Eric Nelson, Joseph Nelson’s brother, created fictitious documents that were used to mislead investors about the solvency of Joseph Nelson and his companies, including altering his brother’s bank statements to reflect balances that were far in excess of the amounts actually in his brother’s accounts. The Complaint also alleged that Wilcox and Thoennes made false and misleading statements to investors, including that Joseph Nelson and his companies owned merchant credit card portfolios, that investor funds would be used to purchase additional portfolios, and that as part owners of the merchant credit card portfolios, investors would earn a portion of the monthly residual fees generated by the portfolios.
On April 12, 2013, the Court entered a final judgment against Eric Nelson permanently enjoining him from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act) and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and finding him liable for disgorgement of $168,000 and prejudgment interest of $55,103, but waiving such amounts based on his financial condition. On February 19, 2013, the Court entered a final judgment against Wilcox permanently enjoining him from violating Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, and finding him liable for disgorgement of $120,000 and prejudgment interest of $11,433, but waiving all but $23,230 of those amounts based on his financial condition. The Court did not order Nelson or Wilcox to pay a civil penalty based on their respective financial conditions. Eric Nelson and Wilcox agreed to settle the Commission’s charges without admitting or denying the allegations in the Complaint.
On December 20, 2012, the Court entered a final judgment by default against Thoennes. The judgment permanently enjoins Thoennes from violating Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, orders her to pay disgorgement of $45,000 and prejudgment interest of $4,791, and orders her pay a civil penalty of $45,000.
Posts
