Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of Apr 14 to Apr 19

Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of Apr 14 to Apr 19.

Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of Apr 14 to Apr 19.

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Carb Cycles
Violation: “CC has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. CC has not been open and co-operative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that CC has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Mr Alan Coppock
Violation: “Mr Coppock has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. Mr Coppock has not been open and co-operative in all his dealings with the Authority, in that Mr Coppock has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for him to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that he is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Spa Car Sales Ltd
Violation: “SCSL has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. SCSL has not been open and co-operative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that SCSL has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: R2R Vehicle Remarketing Ltd
Violation: “RVRL has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. RVRL has not been open and co-operative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that RVRL has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Finance My Car 247 Ltd
Violation: “FMCL has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. FMCL has not been open and co-operative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that FMCL has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system”… Read More

FINRA

6 Enforcement Documents

$0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Michael Patrick Murphy
Violation: Murphy willfully failed to timely amend his Form U4 to disclose the seven Liens, and willfully provided information that was inaccurate as to be misleading with respect to the date he learned of six of the Liens, on his Form U4, both in violation of Article V, Section 2(c) of FINRA’s By-laws, FINRA Rule 1122, and FINRA Rule 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Renee Valerie Altamirano
Violation: Altamirano refused to appear for on-the-record testimony requested by FINRA staff pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. Through this conduct, Altamirano violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: David Manor
Violation: David Manor participated in an unapproved outside business activity with his Wells Fargo customer (“Customer A”), a then 75-year-old retiree. Specifically, Manor assisted Customer A in selling mineral rights on a property the customer owned. In return for his assistance, Customer A paid Manor $107,000. Manor never disclosed this activity to Wells Fargo, in violation of FINRA Rules 3270 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: James Bradley Schwartz
Violation: Schwartz executed approximately 535 trades in these customer accounts resulting in annualized turnover rates ranging from 19.9 to 54.7, and annualized cost-to-equity ratios (or break even points) ranging from 87% to 120% .Schwartz’s churning and excessive trading was unsuitable and caused combined losses of more than $660,000 in these (FP, KK, MN, and DN, from August 2014 through May 2016) four customers’ accounts… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Erin Lynn Verespy
Violation: Verespy refused to cooperate with FINRA’s request for on-the-record testimony pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210, Verespy violates FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Amanda Justine Sarabia
Violation: Respondent failed to comply with FINRA requests for documents and information and testimony, in violation of FINRA rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: £80,000.00
Respondent: Avalon Direct Limited
Violation: Between 1 March 2017 and 20 November 2017, ADL have used a public telecommunications service for the purpose of making 51,917 unsolicited calls to unique numbers for direct marketing purpose to subscribers where the number allocated to the subscriber in respect of the called line was a number listed on the registry of numbers kept by the commissioner in accordance with regulation 26, contrary to regulation 21(1)(b) of PECR… Read More

FTC

3 Enforcement Documents

$4,950,000.00 in Fines

Penalties: $3,850,000.00
Respondent: Avant, LLC
Violation: Avant has engaged in a pattern of deceptive and unfair conduct regarding consumers’ payments and payment information. Avant has deceived consumers about its acceptance of credit and debit cards and has failed to timely apply for paper payments. Avant has also deceived consumers about the amount needed to pay off their loans and has collected or attempted to collect additional payments from consumers who have already paid the quoted payoff amount… Read More

Penalties: $1,100,000.00
Respondent: Bob Robinson, LLC
Violation: The defendants tricked consumers into buying their online system by making false claims that people would earn “hundreds of dollars per hour” working from home… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Bob Robinson, LLC
Violation: De acuerdo con la FTC, los demandados engañaron a los consumidores afirmando que quienes compraran su sistema en línea ganarían “cientos de dólares por hora” trabajando en casa… Read More

SEC

21 Enforcement Documents

$19,122,923.50 in Fines

Penalties: $12,025,210.00
Respondent: “Lawrence P. Schmidt, Commercial Equity Partners, Ltd, FutureGen Company (d/b/a FutureGen Capital)
Violation: “SEC alleged that Schmidt defrauded investors by creating a web of seemingly legitimate companies, including Commercial Equity Partners and FutureGen Company, that were in fact simply designed to entice investment and conceal his misuse and commingling of investor funds. From 2008 through 2014, Schmidt raised nearly $22 million from over 200 unsuspecting investors who purchased notes from the various companies, siphoning off almost $2 million of investor funds for his own benefit, paying old investors with new investor money and ultimately firing all his employees and fleeing the country when his scheme collapsed.”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: “American Express Financial Corporation (now known as Ameriprise Financial, Inc.)”
Violation: Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Commission staff shall transfer $10,726,900.91 to the Fair Fund’s Escrow Account at The Huntington National Bank, and the Fund Administrator shall distribute such monies to investors as provided for in the Plan… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: IMK GROUP, INC.
Violation: The time for filing a petition for review of the initial decision in this proceeding has expired. No such petition has been filed by IMK Group, Inc., MobileBits Holdings Corporation, or National Energy Services, Inc., and the Commission has not chosen to review the decision on its own initiative… Read More

Penalties: $114,052.00
Respondent: Quentin Louis Wilcox
Violation: Quentin Louis Wilcox, of Gilbert, Arizona, sold Avnet stock short and bought Avnet put options shortly before the company’s April 27, 2017 press release announcing disappointing sales for third quarter 2017 and guidance for fourth quarter 2017. As a financial manager for budgeting and forecasting, Wilcox allegedly had access to the confidential information in Avnet’s earnings announcement before it became public. Using this confidential information, Wilcox’s trades netted him approximately $55,000 in profits… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Yuh-Yue Chen
Violation: “Defendant Chen, directly and indirectly, bought Skyworks’ securities between on or about April 21, 2014 and July 17, 2014, while in possession of material, non-public information of Skyworks’ earnings announcements for 2Q2014 and 3Q2014, which Defendant Chen knew, or was reckless in not knowing, was in breach of Skyworks’ Code of Business Conduct and Ethics… Read More

Penalties: $3,983,661.50
Respondent: Fifth Street Management, LLC
Violation: In 2013 and 2014, the Respondent made improper allocations to its former business development company (“BDC”) clients and failed in the valuation of two portfolio company investment held by one of the BDCs. Further, the Respondent did not implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations of the Advisers Act concerning expense allocation until July 2016, did not implement them for the quality control review of its BDC clients’ quarterly valuation models, and did not have adequate policies and procedures concerning the prevention of the use of material, nonpublic information… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Motty Mizrahi
Violation: Mizrahi and MBIG defrauded at least 15 advisory clients out of more than $3 million by falsely claiming that MBIG used sophisticated trading strategies to generate “guaranteed” returns of between 2-3% per month, the investments were risk-free, and clients would not lose their money and could withdraw their funds at any time. Mizrahi covered up his fraud by issuing MBIG’s clients’ false account statements that showed positive account balances and profits from trading and when clients demanded proof of MBIG’s securities holdings, he showed them brokerage statements reflecting a phony multi-million dollar balance for a fictitious MBIG brokerage account… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Harvey Paul Tabb
Violation: Respondent pled guilty to one count of wire fraud in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section 1343 before the United States District Court for the Central District of California… Read More

Penalties: $3,000,000.00
Respondent: Prosper
Violation: Prosper miscalculated and materially overstated the ANR it reported to a total of more than 30,000 investors during the relevant period, in violation of Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act, which prohibits, in the offer or sale of securities, obtaining money or property by means of any material misstatement or any omission to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Kimberly Sredich
Violation: Kimberly Sredich, a Michigan resident, with misappropriating funds from brokerage customers of a registered broker-dealer with which she was associated. The SEC’s complaint alleges that between 2014 and 2018, Sredich sold securities in at least 15 customer accounts and misappropriated the proceeds of the sales. According to the complaint, many of the customers were elderly. The complaint further alleges that Sredich forged customers’ signatures and used blank letters of authorization previously signed by customers to transfer funds to a company she controlled. She then allegedly transferred most of the misappropriated funds to a personal bank account, in violation of Section 10(b) the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder… Read More

X