Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of Feb 17 to Feb 22

Weekly Enforcement Action Tracker

UK-FCA

5 Enforcement Documents

$0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Ben John Kelly
Violation: It appears to the Authority that Mr. Kelly is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that Mr. Kelly is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether Mr. Kelly managed his business in such a way as to ensure that his affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Adam Struzynski
Violation: It appears to the Authority that Mr. Struzynski is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that Mr. Struzynski is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether Mr. Struzynski managed his business in such a way as to ensure that his affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Dean Woods
Violation: It appears to the Authority that Mr. Woods is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that Mr. Woods is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether Mr. Woods managed his business in such a way as to ensure that his affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Forest Auto Sales
Violation: It appears to the Authority that Mr. Townsend is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that Mr. Townsend is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether Mr. Townsend managed his business in such a way as to ensure that his affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner…. Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Leigh Waterfield
Violation: It appears to the Authority that Mr. Waterfield is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that Mr. Waterfield is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether Mr. Waterfield managed his business in such a way as to ensure that his affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner…. Read More

FINRA

5 Enforcement Documents

$10,000.00 in Fines

Penalties: $10,000.00
Respondent: Matthew B. Marietta
Violation: In January and February 2017, Marietta authored four research reports about Issuer A without disclosing that he was engaged in advanced employment discussions with the company. He thereby violated FINRA Rules 2241(c)(4)(I), 2241(e), and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Thomas C. Oakes
Violation: In connection with an investigation of several customer complaints, FINRA issued a request for Oakes to appear for on-the-record testimony pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. In response, Oakes stated that he would not appear for testimony, therefore, he violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Bradley Curtis Williams
Violation: In January 2017, Williams converted $2,254.06 from JPMS’s bank affiliate by engaging in a kiting scheme involving electronic funds transfers between bank accounts under his control. Williams thereby violated FINRA Rule 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: John William Spach
Violation: Spach failed to provide documents and information requested by FINRA pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. As a result, Spach violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Stephen Michael Hart
Violation: Hart failed to provide documents and information requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210, in violation of FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

SEC

13 Enforcement Documents

$1,414,412.91 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Trudy R. Gilmond
Violation: Gilmond made material misstatements and omissions to ZeekRewards investors concerning, among other things, ZeekRewards’ promised 1.5% daily returns. Gilmond engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities for the accounts of others, all without registering as a broker. Gilmond used means of interstate commerce to offer and sell theZeekRewards securities when no registration statement had been filed with the Commission or was in effect with respect to them, and when no exemption from registration was applicable… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Vishal Savla
Violation: Savla made false statements to investors regarding investment returns, hid substantial losses from investors, sent fraudulent account statements to investors, and misappropriated investor funds for his own personal benefit… Read More

Penalties: TBD
Respondent: Gladius Network LLC
Violation: Gladius violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act by offering and selling these securities without having a registrations statement in effect with the Commission or qualifying for exemption from registration… Read More

Penalties: TBD
Respondent: SEC Complaint – Joseph Frank Vacante
Violation: This action involves illegal insider trading in the securities of Trinity Biotech plc (“Trinity”) by Joseph Frank Vacante prior to an October 4, 2016 public announcement that Trinity had decided to withdraw from consideration with the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) a 510(k) premarket notification submission. By engaging in the conduct described above, Vacante violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)] and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)], and Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b5]… Read More

Penalties: $147,901.00
Respondent: Joseph Frank Vacante
Violation: September 29, 2016, Vacante learned that the FDA had recommended that Trinity withdraw two products which Vacante believed represented the future of the company. That same day, Vacante twice communicated with his broker in efforts to sell Trinity American Depository Receipts (ADRs) which he had received as part of his employment, including lowering the price to ensure the sale occurred… Read More

Penalties: TBD
Respondent: SEC Complaint – Spartan Securities Group, Ltd., Island Capital Management LLC, Carl E. Dilley, Micah J. Eldred, and David D. Lopez
Violation: This action involves Defendants’ roles in one or two separate fraudulent schemes from approximately December 2009 through August 2014 to manufacture at least 19 public companies for sale fundamentally premised on a deceptive public float of purportedly “free-trading” securities: 14 by Alivin Mirman and Sheldon Rose (the “Mirman/Rose Companies,” identified in paragraph 30 below) and five by Michael Daniels, Andy Fan, and Diane Harrison (the “Daniels Companies,” identified in paragraph 102 below)… Read More

Penalties: $190,000.00
Respondent: Mathias Francisco Sandoval Herrera and Maria D. Cidre
Violation: Over the course of 2012, the estimated overstatement grew to tens of millions of dollars. Instead of disclosing the overstatement pursuant to General Cable’s policies and system of internal controls, the complaint alleges that Sandoval and Cidre concealed the errors by omitting them from required reports and making false certifications to executive management… Read More

Penalties: TBD
Respondent: Spartan Securities Group, Ltd., Island Capital Management LLC, Carl E. Dilley, Micah J. Eldred, and David D. Lopez
Violation: Spartan Securities violated Section 15(c)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 15c2-11 thereunder, and that Dilley, Eldred and, Lopez aided and abetted those violations. Spartan Securities, Island Stock Transfer, Dilley and Eldred violated, and aided and abetted violations of, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act. Spartan Securities, Island Stock Transfer, and Dilley violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”)… Read More

Penalties: $342,576.00
Respondent: James S. Polese, et al.
Violation: Engaging in various schemes to defraud their clients, including fraudulently misappropriating $350,000 of one client’s money, using $100,000 of those funds to make investments in their own names, and directing the remaining $250,000 to Polese’s personal bank account… Read More

Penalties: $277,254.00
Respondent: Derik J. Todd, et al.
Violation: Willfully violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”). MCI, Big Horn and MRM willfully aided and abetted and caused Todd’s and Fund II GP’s violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Advisers Act… Read More

Penalties: $452,998.00
Respondent: Walter C. Little and Andrew M. Berke
Violation: Walter C. Little accessed confidential documents on his law firm’s internal computer network related to at least 11 impending announcements involving law firm clients, none of which he personally advised or billed for services. Traded in advance of each announcement and often tipped his neighbor, Andrew M. Berke, with material nonpublic information so he could similarly trade in company stocks before the announcements were made publicly… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Ernest J. Romer, III
Violation: As an agent, servant, or employee of certain named persons and/or being a trustee, bailee, or custodian of the property of such named persons, did convert to his own use or take or secrete with intent to convert to his own use, without consent of his principal, money or personal property of his principal having a value ranging from between $20,000 to $50,000 and/or $100,000 or more, that came into his possession or under his charge or control by virtue of his relationship with the principal… Read More

Penalties: $3,683.91
Respondent: Kenneth C. Meissner, James Doug Scott, and Mark S. “Mike” Tomich
Violation: On September 25, 2017, the Commission approved the Plan of Distribution (“Plan”) for the above-captioned matter, finding that the Criminal Action arose from substantially similar facts as those alleged in the Administrative Order, including a largely coincident victim pool and substantial overlap in the duration of the fraud… Read More

X