churning

Silver Law Group Files Securities Arbitration Case Against Dawson James

May 29, 2015 | Silver Law Group

The Silver Law Group has filed a securities arbitration claim before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) on behalf of a family and a family business from South America alleging, among other things, that Dawson James failed to properly supervise one of its registered representatives, permitted an unsuitable investment strategy to be utilized and permitted the family’s investment accounts to be excessively traded for the purposes of generating huge commissions for itself and its registered representatives while wiping out most of their customers’ investment capital in a very short period of time.

Excessive trading or “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.

Dawson James Securities markets itself as a full service investment firm specializing in complex healthcare, biotechnology, technology, and clean-tech sectors. Headquartered in Boca Raton, Florida, the firm has been in operation since 2002. Dawson James has been the subject of several regulatory investigations, some which resulted in disciplinary actions by regulators. For example, FINRA recently censured and fined Dawson James $75,000 for failing to provide adequate supervisory procedures. FINRA found that during the review period the firm failed to investigate numerous “red flags” relating to the activities of one registered representative. Dawson James also failed to enforce its written supervisory procedures which specified that all electronic correspondence is reviewed on a daily basis. The firm has also been the subject of several customer FINRA arbitration claims.

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.

Federal Appeals Court Upholds SEC Ban on Broker-Dealer Principal for Failing to Prevent Churning and Excessive Trading

June 19, 2014 | Silver Law Group

In July 2013, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued a lifetime ban upon Carl Birkelbach, the founder and principal of Birkelbach Investment Securities (headquartered in Chicago, Illinois), which prevents him from participating in any working capacity in the securities industry. Mr. Birkelbach appealed the SEC’s ban, claiming in part that the SEC exceeded its authority in imposing such a severe penalty upon him. Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago denied his appeal and upheld the SEC ban, stating that Mr. Birkelbach’s offenses were sufficiently egregious to warrant the sanction imposed by the SEC.

As the head of Birkelbach Investment Securities, Mr. Birkelbach was required to supervise the trading activities of the company’s registered representatives, including William Murphy. According to the SEC, Mr. Murphy engaged for years in unauthorized conduct, steering clients into unsuitable investments, and churning in client accounts — all of which Mr. Birkelbach was purportedly aware of. Despite Mr. Birkelbach’s alleged knowledge of the wrongdoing taking place at his company, he imposed no discipline upon Mr. Murphy, never disapproved of a single trade by Murphy, and never contacted the most egregiously harmed customer to discuss the high volume of trading in the customer’s account. During the years in question, the revenues from Mr. Murphy’s trading in that account, according to SEC calculations, represented nearly 20% of Birkelbach Investment Securities’ total revenue. Even when the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) requested that Mr. Birkelbach place Mr. Murphy on heightened supervision, Mr. Birkelbach failed to comply. As a result, FINRA imposed upon Mr. Birkelbach a punishment that ultimately became a lifetime ban from the securities industry in any capacity, which the SEC subsequently affirmed in its July 2013 ruling.

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.

Connecticut Securities Regulator Seeks to Bar Meyers Associates from Selling Securities in Connecticut

April 16, 2014 | Silver Law Group

If the Connecticut Department of Banking (the “Department”) has its way, Meyers Associates and its owner, Bruce Meyers, will be barred from selling securities in Connecticut. A February 2014 Order to Cease and Desist issued by the Department, charges Meyers Associates and Bruce Meyers (“Respondents”) with numerous violations of Connecticut securities laws. The Order states the Department’s intent to fine Respondents and revoke their registration to sell securities in Connecticut.

The present charges against Respondents stem from a 2012 examination by the Department, out of which the Department claims to have discovered multiple violations of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act and FINRA rules. Notably, the Department alleges that Respondents failed to properly supervise employees with known disciplinary histories, violated an order from the Vermont securities regulator, and failed to completely respond to both the Department’s and FINRA’s requests for information and documents.

In seeking fines and revocation of Respondents’ licenses, the Department cites to Meyers Associates’ history of run-ins with the Department over allegations that it employed unregistered agents, offered and sold unregistered securities, engaged in fraud in connection with the sale of securities, engaged in dishonest and unethical practices, violated FINRA conduct rules, and failed to enforce and maintain adequate supervisory procedures. FINRA’s BrokerCheck report for Meyers Associates shows 14 final regulatory events, two pending regulatory events, and nine final arbitrations.