Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of November 16 to November 22

Financial-Enforcement-Actions-Week-of-November-16-to-November-22

Financial-Enforcement-Actions-Week-of-November-16-to-November-22

FTC

3 Enforcement Documents

$0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: BunZai Media Group, Inc
Violation: Defendants operate a common 4 enterprise through which they: (a) fail to disclose adequately material terms of 5 their sales offer, including the offer’s costs and negative option features; (b) 6 falsely represent that consumers can obtain their products on a “trial” or “risk7 free” trial basis for only a nominal shipping and handling fee; (c) fail to obtain a 8 consumer’s informed consent to the material terms, including the negative option 9 feature, of the transaction before charging the consumer; (d) falsely represent their 10 business is accredited by the Better Business Bureau with an “A-” rating; (e) fail 11 to provide consumers a simple method of cancelling their negative option 12 continuity plan, and ( f) debit consumers’ bank accounts on a recurring basis 13 without obtaining written authorization from the consumer or providing a written 14 copy of the authorization to the consumer… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Medable, Inc
Violation: The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has conducted an investigation of certain acts and practices of Medable, Inc. (“Proposed Respondent”). The Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection (“BCP”) has prepared a draft of an administrative Complaint (“draft Complaint”). BCP and Proposed Respondent, through its duly authorized officer, enter into this Agreement Containing Consent Order (“Consent Agreement”) to resolve the allegations in the attached draft Complaint through a proposed Decision and Order to present to the Commission, which is also attached and made a part of this Consent Agreement… Read More

CFPB

3 Enforcement Documents

$6,000,000.00 in Fines

Penalties: $6,000,000.00
Respondent: Sterling Infosystems, Inc
Violation: Sterling violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by (1) failing to employ reasonable procedures to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information about consumers it included in the consumer reports it prepared; (2) failing to maintain strict procedures to ensure that public record information about consumers that it included in consumer reports it prepared was complete and up to date or notify consumers, at the time that such information was reported, of the fact that public record information was being reported; and (3) reporting criminal history information and other adverse information about consumers outside of the reporting period allowed by the FCRA… Read More

SEC

16 Enforcement Documents

$49,160,443.90 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: James S. Kimmel
Violation: According to the application and supporting papers, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, the SEC is investigating potential insider trading in the securities of Ampio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a publicly traded company headquartered in Englewood, Colorado (Ampio). The SEC’s application states that the SEC seeks Judge Kimmel’s testimony to inquire about, among other things, Judge Kimmel’s trading in Ampio securities, and his communications with individuals associated with Ampio… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Burkholz, et al.
Violation: According to the SEC’s complaint, Neil Burkholz of Boca Raton, Florida, and Frank Bianco, of Pembroke Pines, Florida, through their companies Palm Financial Management LLC and Shore Management Systems LLC, solicited investors by falsely representing that their proprietary options trading strategies were highly profitable. In reality, as alleged in the complaint, defendants invested less than half of investor funds, and those investments resulted in near-total losses. The complaint alleges that defendants misappropriated the remaining funds by using them to repay other investors and by transferring approximately $880,000 of investor funds to themselves and their spouses for personal use. According to the SEC’s complaint, the defendants sent false reports to investors to conceal their fraudulent conduct and give the investors the false impression they were generating positive returns… Read More

Penalties: $50,000.00
Respondent: Channing Capital Management, LLC.
Violation: As a result of the conduct described above, Channing willfully1 violated Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-7 thereunder, which require investment advisers to adopt and implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations of the Advisers Act and the rules thereunder… Read More

Penalties: $26,609,739.94
Respondent: UBS Financial Services Inc. of Puerto Rico
Violation: On May 1, 2012, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 15(b) and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order (the “Order”)1 against UBS Financial Services Inc. of Puerto Rico (the “Respondent”). In the Order, the Commission found that, from May 15, 2008 through September 30, 2009, the Respondent violated federal securities laws by making misleading statements to investors, concealing a liquidity crisis, and masking its control of the secondary market for 23 proprietary closed-end mutual funds… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Edward Dean Goss
Violation: Respondent and others misrepresented to investors and/or omitted to disclose to investors that, among other things, Jersey was owned and operated by a convicted felon, Jersey had no BLM claim, Jersey’s technology was not commercially viable, Jersey had no material revenues, the value of Jersey’s physical assets was insufficient to secure Jersey investors, Jersey funds were dissipated through personal use by Jersey principals, and some Jersey investors were repaid with funds raised from subsequent Jersey investors (i.e., a Ponzi scheme)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Renwick Haddow
Violation: Respondent will be subject to the applicable laws and regulations governing the reentry process, and reentry may be conditioned upon a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the satisfaction of any or all of the following: (a) any disgorgement ordered against the Respondent, whether or not the Commission has fully or partially waived payment of such disgorgement; (b) any arbitration award related to the conduct that served as the basis for the Commission order; (c) any self-regulatory organization arbitration award to a customer, whether or not related to the conduct that served as the basis for the Commission order; and (d) any restitution order by a self-regulatory organization, whether or not related to the conduct that served as the basis for the Commission order… Read More

Penalties: $13,934,213.00
Respondent: Samuel DelPresto, et al.
Violation: The SEC’s complaint, filed on December 15, 2015 and amended on December 21, 2015, alleged that DelPresto and his partner secretly acquired ownership of the vast majority of shares of at least four microcap companies as part of a scheme to heavily promote the companies’ stocks and then dump the shares on the public. Toomer, an investment adviser associated with a registered entity, received cash kickbacks in exchange for purchasing three of the companies’ stocks in his advisory clients’ accounts, thereby creating an artificial appearance of liquidity and demand… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Ruless Pierre a/k/a Rules Pierre
Violation: The SEC’s complaint, filed in Federal District Court in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, charges Pierre with violating 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 Section 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder. The complaint also names R. Pierre Consulting Group LLC as a relief defendant… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Dale Scott Pearlman
Violation: “The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Dale Scott Pearlman (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Michael P. Dunne
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Michael P. Dunne (“Dunne” or “Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Thomas H. Vetter
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Thomas H. Vetter (“Respondent”)… Read More

X