SEC ANNOUNCES SETTLEMENT OF FRAUD CHARGES WITH OWNERS OF RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE COMPANY

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

08/13/2015 11:30 AM EDT

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that three Maryland men have agreed to settle charges that they defrauded investors in a company that owns and operates residential and commercial real estate.  Boston-based Signator Investors Inc. and one of its supervisors agreed to settle separate charges that they failed to supervise two of the men who worked in Signator’s Maryland office.

The SEC alleges that James R. Glover orchestrated the fraud by enticing family, friends, and fellow church members to become his clients at Signator and invest in Colonial Tidewater Realty Income Partners, which he co-managed.  Most of Glover’s clients were financially unsophisticated and relied on him for investment guidance.  Some even described him as “another dad” or “part of the family.”

“Glover lied to unsuspecting members of his close-knit religious community and preyed upon the trust they placed in him as their registered representative,” said Sharon B. Binger, Director of the SEC’s Philadelphia Regional Office.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Baltimore against Colonial Tidewater, Glover, and Colonial Tidewater’s co-manager Sherman T. Hill:
Glover steered approximately 125 clients to purchase partnership units in Colonial Tidewater.

Glover and Hill provided false and misleading written statements about Colonial Tidewater’s value and financial condition.

Glover lied to investors about the liquidity of Colonial Tidewater’s investments and the expected returns.

Glover and Cory D. Williams, his business partner in Signator’s Maryland office, did not inform clients that they received undisclosed commissions from Colonial Tidewater when clients invested in the company, thus failing to disclose conflicts of interest.

Glover misappropriated hundreds of thousands of dollars of investor funds.
According to an SEC order instituting a settled administrative proceeding against Signator and Gregory J. Mitchell, who was a supervisor in Signator’s Maryland office:

Signator and Mitchell failed to identify and prevent the alleged fraud conducted by Glover and Williams.

Signator failed to have reasonable policies and procedures governing consolidated reports, which could be used to combine all of a client’s financial holdings in a single report.  

Glover, without Signator’s knowledge, inserted clients’ Colonial Tidewater holdings into the consolidated reports to create the false impression that Colonial Tidewater was a Signator-approved investment when it was never authorized for sale by Signator representatives.

Rather than following Signator’s policies and procedures, Mitchell routinely allowed Glover and Williams to select client files for his review or he provided them a pre-selected list of names of client files to be reviewed, enabling them to remove all references to Colonial Tidewater investments before Mitchell reviewed the records.

“Signator and Mitchell failed to conduct the thorough reviews necessary to catch Glover and Williams in the act of defrauding investors,” said Ms. Binger.

Colonial Tidewater, Glover, and Hill agreed to settle the SEC’s charges without admitting or denying the allegations, and consented to the appointment of a receiver to take control of Colonial Tidewater.  Under settlements that are subject to court approval, Colonial Tidewater would be required to pay $527,844 in disgorgement, $66,542 in prejudgment interest, and a $725,000 penalty.  Glover agreed to be barred from the securities industry and pay $839,128 in disgorgement, $64,977 in prejudgment interest, and a $450,000 penalty.  Hill agreed to pay a $75,000 penalty.

In a separate SEC order, Williams agreed to settle charges that he violated provisions of the Investment Advisers Act.  Without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, he agreed to be barred from the securities industry and pay $94,191 in disgorgement, $9,854 in prejudgment interest, and a $94,191 penalty.

Signator and Mitchell agreed to pay penalties of $450,000 and $15,000 respectively without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings.  Signator agreed to be censured and Mitchell agreed to be suspended from acting in a supervisory capacity for one year.

Funds collected from all the parties will go into a Fair Fund for injured investors.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Suzanne C. Abt, Assunta Vivolo, Scott A. Thompson, and Kelly L. Gibson in the Philadelphia Regional Office and supervised by G. Jeffrey Boujoukos.  The litigation will be handled by Christopher R. Kelly and David L. Axelrod.  The investigation followed an examination conducted by James O’Leary and Aidan Busch of the Philadelphia office under the supervision of Frank A. Thomas.  The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

SEC ANNOUNCES EDWARD JONES SETTLES CHARGES REGARDING OVERCHARGING CUSTOMERS IN MUNI BOND SALES

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

08/13/2015 09:05 AM EDT

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that St. Louis-based brokerage firm Edward Jones and the former head of its municipal underwriting desk have agreed to settle charges that they overcharged customers in new municipal bonds sales.  It’s the SEC’s first case against an underwriter for pricing-related fraud in the primary market for municipal securities.  The firm also was charged with separate misconduct related to supervisory failures in its review of certain secondary market municipal bond trades.

Municipal bond underwriters are required to offer new bonds to their customers at what is known as the “initial offering price,” which is negotiated with the issuer of the bonds.  An SEC investigation found that instead of offering bonds to customers at the initial offering price, Edward Jones and Stina R. Wishman took new bonds into Edward Jones’ own inventory and improperly offered them to customers at higher prices.  In other instances, Edward Jones entirely refrained from offering the bonds to its customers until after trading commenced in the secondary market, and then offered the bonds at prices higher than the initial offering prices.  The firm’s customers paid at least $4.6 million more than they should have for new bonds.  In one instance, the misconduct resulted in an adverse federal tax determination for an issuer and put it at risk of losing valuable federal tax subsidies.

Edward Jones agreed to settle the case by paying more than $20 million, which includes nearly $5.2 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest that will be distributed to current and former customers who were overcharged for the bonds.  Wishman agreed to pay $15,000 and will be barred from working in the securities industry for at least two years.

“Edward Jones undermined the integrity of the bond underwriting process by overcharging retail customers by at least $4.6 million and by misleading municipal issuers,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, Director of the SEC Enforcement Division.  “This enforcement action, which is the first of its kind, reflects our commitment to addressing abuses in all areas of the municipal bond market.”

According to the SEC’s order instituting a settled administrative proceeding against Edward Jones, the firm’s supervisory failures related to dealer markups on secondary market trades that involved the firm purchasing municipal bonds from customers, placing them into its inventory, and selling them to other customers often within the same day.  Because of the short holding periods, the firm faced little risk as a principal and almost never experienced losses on these intraday trades.  The SEC’s investigation found that Edward Jones’ supervisory system was not designed to monitor whether the markups it charged customers for certain trades were reasonable.

“Because current rules do not require dealers to disclose markups on municipal bonds, investors receive very little information about their dealer’s compensation in municipal bond trades,” said LeeAnn Ghazil Gaunt, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit.  “It is therefore important that firms have adequate supervisory systems to ensure that they are complying with their fair pricing obligations.”

Edward Jones consented to the SEC order without admitting or denying the findings that the firm willfully violated Sections 17(a)(2) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 15B(c)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rules G-17, G-11(b) and (d), G-27, and G-30(a) of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB).  The firm also failed reasonably to supervise within the meaning of Section 15(b)(4)(E) of the Exchange Act.  Edward Jones undertook a number of remedial efforts and now discloses the percentage and dollar amount of markups on all fixed income retail order trade confirmations in principal transactions.

Wishman consented to a separate SEC order without admitting or denying the findings that she willfully violated Sections 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, MSRB Rules G-17, G-11(b) and (d), and G-30(a).  She also was a cause of Edward Jones’ violations of Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act and Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit members Kevin Guerrero, Ivonia K. Slade, Eric A. Celauro, Sally J. Hewitt, and Brian D. Fagel along with Joseph O. Chimienti, Jonathan Wilcox, and the unit’s deputy chief Mark R. Zehner.  Providing assistance were members of the SEC’s National Exam Program, including Michael Fioribello, Paul N. Mensheha, and Stephen Vilim.


Statement on Edward D. Jones Enforcement Action

Commissioners Luis A. Aguilar, Daniel M. Gallagher, Kara M. Stein and Michael S. Piwowar
Aug. 13, 2015

The Commission’s recent enforcement action against Edward D. Jones involving the offer and sale of municipal bonds to retail investors highlights the need for clear rules requiring the disclosure of mark-ups and mark-downs.[1] We encourage the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) to complete rules mandating transparency of mark-ups and mark-downs, even in riskless principal trades. If not, we believe the Commission should propose rules to address this important issue.


[1] See In the Matter of Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., Exch. Act Rel. No. 75688 (Aug. 13, 2015) available at http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2015/33-9889.pdf.

SEC ANNOUNCES FORMER SOFTWARE EXEC TO SETTLE BRIBERY CHARGES

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

08/12/2015 03:45 PM EDT

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that a former executive at a worldwide software manufacturer has agreed to settle charges that he violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) by bribing Panamanian government officials through an intermediary to procure software license sales.

An SEC investigation found that Vicente E. Garcia, the former vice president of global and strategic accounts for SAP SE, orchestrated a scheme to pay $145,000 in bribes to one government official and promised to pay two others in order to obtain four contracts to sell SAP software to the Panamanian government.  He essentially caused SAP, which is headquartered in Germany and executes most of its sales through a network of worldwide corporate partners, to sell software to a partner in Panama at discounts of up to 82 percent.  The excessive discounts enabled the partner to create a slush fund from its excessive earnings on the other end of the sales and tap that money to pay the bribes to Panamanian government officials so SAP could sell the software.  Garcia, who lives in Miami, also received kickbacks from the slush fund into his bank account.

In a parallel action, the U.S. Department of Justice today announced a criminal action against Garcia.

“Garcia attempted to avoid detection by arranging large, illegitimate discounts to a corporate partner in order to generate a cash pot to bribe government officials and win business for SAP,” said Kara Brockmeyer, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s FCPA Unit.

According to the SEC’s order instituting a settled administrative proceeding:

The scheme lasted from 2009 to 2013.

Garcia circumvented SAP’s internal controls by submitting various approval forms to SAP that falsified the reasons for the excessive discounts to the local partner.

Garcia used his SAP e-mail account and his personal e-mail account to communicate details of the bribery scheme and even identify the government officials and intended monetary amounts.

In an e-mail to one government official, Garcia attached a letter on SAP letterhead detailing fictional meetings in Mexico as requested by the official in order to justify a trip there on false pretenses.  The next day, Garcia sent a subsequent e-mail asking, “Any news …?  Was the document OK for him?  Can you ask him to finalize a deal for us in Feb-March, I need between $5 and $10 million.”

The SEC’s order finds that Garcia violated the anti-bribery and internal controls provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  Garcia consented to the entry of the cease-and-desist order and agreed to pay disgorgement of $85,965, which is the total amount of kickbacks he received, plus prejudgment interest of $6,430 for a total of $92,395.

The SEC’s continuing investigation is being conducted by Ansu Banerjee and supervised by Alka Patel.  The SEC appreciates the assistance of the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

SEC ANNOUNCES $20.3 MILLION SETTLEMENT RELATED TO MISUSE OF DARK POOL TRADING SUBSCRIBER INFO AND OPERATING SECRET TRADING DESK

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

08/12/2015 09:00 AM EDT

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that ITG Inc. and its affiliate AlterNet Securities have agreed to pay $20.3 million to settle charges that they operated a secret trading desk and misused the confidential trading information of dark pool subscribers.

An SEC investigation found that despite telling the public that it was an “agency-only” broker whose interests don’t conflict with its customers, ITG operated an undisclosed proprietary trading desk known as “Project Omega” for more than a year.  While ITG claimed to protect the confidentiality of its dark pool subscribers’ trading information, during an eight-month period Project Omega accessed live feeds of order and execution information of its subscribers and used it to implement high-frequency algorithmic trading strategies, including one in which it traded against subscribers in ITG’s dark pool called POSIT.

ITG agreed to admit wrongdoing and pay disgorgement of $2,081,034 (the total proprietary revenues generated by Project Omega) plus prejudgment interest of $256,532 and a penalty of $18 million that is the SEC’s largest to date against an alternative trading system.

“ITG created a secret trading desk and misused highly confidential customer order and trading information for its own benefit,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.  “In doing so, ITG abused the trust of its customers and engaged in conduct justifying the significant sanctions imposed in this case.”

According to the SEC’s order instituting a settled administrative proceeding:

Project Omega traded a total of approximately 1.3 billion shares, including approximately 262 million shares with unsuspecting subscribers in ITG’s own dark pool.
Project Omega employed an algorithmic trading strategy called the “Facilitation Strategy” in which it executed trades based on a live feed of information concerning orders that its sell-side subscribers sent to ITG’s algorithms for handling.

Project Omega accessed the feed by connecting to a software utility that was used by ITG’s sales and support teams.  As a result, Project Omega had a real-time view of subscriber orders being placed through ITG’s algorithms.
From April to December 2010, the Facilitation Strategy was designed to detect open orders of sell-side subscribers being handled by ITG.  Based on that information, Project Omega opened positions in displayed markets on the same side of the market as the detected orders, and then closed these positions in POSIT by trading against the detected orders.  By employing this strategy, Project Omega sought to capture the full “bid-ask spread” between the National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO).

Project Omega had access to the identities of POSIT subscribers and used this information to identify sell-side subscribers and trade with them in the dark pool in connection with the Facilitation Strategy.

To earn the full “bid-ask spread” in connection with the Facilitation Strategy, Project Omega needed the subscribers with which it traded in POSIT to be configured to trade “aggressively” so that the subscribers would “cross the spread” to trade with Project Omega.  Project Omega took steps to ensure that the sell-side subscribers were configured to trade aggressively in POSIT.
Project Omega’s other primary strategy called the “Heatmap Strategy” involved trading on markets other than POSIT based on a live feed of confidential information relating to customer executions in other dark pools.  Based on customer executions, Project Omega’s Heatmap algorithm was designed to open positions in specific securities in displayed markets at the bid or the offer and then close them at midpoint or better in the external dark pools where customers had received midpoint executions.  The goal of this strategy was to earn a “half spread” or better based on knowledge of ITG customers’ executions.

The SEC’s order finds that ITG violated Sections 17(a)(2) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with Project Omega by engaging in a course of business that operated as a fraud and by failing to make disclosures about Project Omega and its proprietary trading activities.  ITG also violated Rules 301(b)(2) and 301(b)(10) of Regulation ATS by failing to amend its Form ATS filings in light of Project Omega’s trading activities in POSIT, failing to establish adequate safeguards, and failing to implement adequate oversight procedures to protect the confidential trading information of POSIT subscribers.

The SEC’s continuing investigation is being conducted by Paul T. Chryssikos, Scott A. Thompson, Matthew Koop, and Mandy B. Sturmfelz of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Market Abuse Unit with assistance from G. Jeffrey Boujoukos of the Philadelphia Regional Office.  The case is being supervised by Joseph G. Sansone, acting co-chief of the unit.  Substantial assistance was provided by Michael J. Gaw and Tyler Raimo of the Division of Trading and Markets.

Remarks at a Press Conference Announcing Major Enforcement Charges Involving a Massive Hacking Trading Scheme

Remarks at a Press Conference Announcing Major Enforcement Charges Involving a Massive Hacking Trading Scheme

NY RESIDENT AND COMPANY CHARGED BY CFTC WITH MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS TO NFA

FROM:  U.S. COMMODITIES FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

CFTC Charges New York Resident Gary Creagh and his Company, Wall Street Pirate Management, LLC, with Making False Statements to the National Futures Association

Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today announced the filing of an enforcement action charging Defendants Gary Creagh and Wall Street Pirate Management, LLC (Wall Street Pirate), both of New York, New York, with making false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or omissions to the National Futures Association (NFA) in statutorily required reports and during an NFA audit, in violation of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA). Both Wall Street Pirate and Creagh, the managing member and sole employee of Wall Street Pirate, were registered with the CFTC at the time of the conduct.

The CFTC Complaint, filed on August 5, 2015, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, charges that, from at least December 2011 through September 2013, Creagh willfully made false statements or representations to the NFA and concealed material information from the NFA. Specifically, Creagh falsely represented to the NFA on multiple occasions that the commodity pool he operated on behalf of Wall Street Pirate was not active, despite the fact that he had accepted funds from prospective pool participants and actively traded commodity futures on behalf of the commodity pool, according to the Complaint. The CFTC Complaint also charges that Wall Street Pirate, by and through Creagh, failed to maintain required books and records and provide account statements and privacy notices to pool participants.

The NFA is a Chicago-based futures association, which is registered with the CFTC and serves as an industry self-regulatory organization. Pursuant to the CEA, the NFA is responsible, under CFTC oversight, for certain aspects of the regulation of futures entities and their associated persons.

In its continuing litigation against the Defendants, the CFTC seeks disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, restitution to defrauded customers, a civil monetary penalty, permanent trading and registration bans, and a permanent injunction against further violations of the federal commodities laws, as charged.

CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members responsible for this case are Jonah E. McCarthy, Timothy J. Mulreany, Patricia Gomersall, and Paul G. Hayeck.

The CFTC would like to thank the NFA for its cooperation in this matter.