|
NOTE: Stipulation of Facts and Consent to Penalty (SFC), Offers of Settlement (OS), and Letters of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) are entered into by Respondents without admitting or denying the allegations, but consent is given to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings. FINANCIAL
INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY VISIT
WALL STREET'S LEADING ONLINE COMMUNITY |
|
Filiep Paul Sackx AWC/2007009784401/September 2009 NEWSLETTERS
SEMINARS
Filiep Paul Sackx: Fined $15,000; Suspended 6 months |
| Bill Singer's Comment: A nice hand for FINRA! A well presented case. Easy to follow and replete with sufficient information to be both informative and educative. Promote the author of this report--immediately; and giver he/she a huge salary increase and fair bonus. |
|
Robert Bassari (Principal) AWC/2008013061401/September 2009 Bassari drafted a form letter about his previous employer and mailed it to former (potential) customers, which constituted sales literature without prior approval of an appropriate registered principal of his member firm. The form letter failed to provide a sound basis for statements contained in the letter, and contained other statements that were unwarranted. Robert Bassari: Fined $5,000; Suspended 10 business days |
|
RBC Capital Markets Corporation OS/2005002206701/September 2009 RBC Capital Markets Corp allowed associated persons to function as research analysts without having Series 86 or 87 research analyst registrations. The unregistered analysts published more than 3,500 research reports, and published more than 400 research reports after FINRA informed the firm that it had made a preliminary determination to recommend disciplinary action be initiated (one of the cited reports was published 7 months after the issuance of the Wells Notice) against the firm for its failure to appropriately register its research analysts (the Wells Notice). RBC Capital Markets Corporation: Censured; Fined $150,000 |
| Bill Singer's Comment: This one sort of caught my attention. First of all, it involves RBC,which many of us have long held as a fairly conservative organization not known for non-compliant behavior -- yeah, coming from me of all folks, that's is very high praise. Second, allowing unregistered analysts to pen thousands of research reports is a fairly big goof bordering on epic proportions; all the more so for a somewhat staid firm like RBC. Third, after the Ref throws the flag on the field, you then go out and fail to catch a further 400 reports authored by mere associated persons -- and you let the last report get published as far as 7 months after the notice? |
|
David Travis Weitz AWC/2007011496201/August 2009 Weitz
David Travis Weitz: Fined $10,000; Suspended 30 days |
| Bill Singer's Comment: See this apparent companion case: Haggerty |
|
Jamie Patrick Lake AWC/2009017481401/August 2009 Lake solicited customers to invest a total of $729,500 in different investment schemes through his weekly radio talk-show and daily radio advertising spots. Lake converted $671,321 he solicited for his personal use and returned $58,179 to customers. Jamie Patrick Lake: Barred |
|
Stephanie Murch Haggerty AWC/2007011496202/August 2009 Haggerty
Stephanie Murch Haggerty: Fined $10,000; Suspended 30 days |
|
Bill Singer's Comment: Assuming that we accept FINRA's explanation of
the facts, it seems that Haggerty authored a "Stock Pick" column
in a newsletter sent out by her firm. That's not a minor fact. How
come someone at her firm didn't hold up publication of the newsletter when
it realized that Haggerty was publishing material without anyone having
pre-approved it? Further, why did Haggerty's Firm permit her to
author research analyses (and why when she did not hold the Series
86/87? How could her firm not have had prior notice of her authored
materials when the firm published the column in its own
newsletter?
This would be like my law firm asking a non-lawyer employee to draft a legal article under his/her name to be included on the firm's website and sent out in its newsletter. Then, when it turns out that the article has some errors and failed to disclose ethical conflicts, my law firm would argue that it didn't know the non-lawyer wasn't a lawyer, that the non-lawyer should not authored the article, and that the non-lawyer failed to disclose conflicts. Yeah, like that's going to work. Something here is just not making sense -- of course, that something could be FINRA, which wouldn't be that much of a shock to me. |
|
Wedge Securities, LLC AWC/2007011191101/July 2009 The Firm failed to
Wedge Securities, LLC: Censured; Fined $20,00 |
|
Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. AWC/2007009479501/June 2009 The Firm
Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc.: Censured; Fined $200,000 |
|
Robert Eugene Strong (Principal) C0420050005/May 2009 Securities and Exchange Commission sustained findings of violation and sanctions on appeal of a National Adjudicatory Council decision on appeal from Office of Hearing Officers decision. Chief Compliance Officer Strong failed to supervise a research analyst who sold securities in his personal trading account contrary to the recommendations contained in various firm research reports, and allowed the trader to execute purchase transactions during the blackout periods. Strong failed to include, or included insufficient or inaccurate required disclosures in research reports, and failed to timely file an annual attestation of supervisory procedures for research analysts. http://sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2008/34-57426.pdf Robert Eugene Strong: Fined $10,000 |
Bill Singer's Comment: An interesting case and I would recommend that
you read the SEC Opinion. I would note the following, as stated in
that Opinion at pages 19-20:
|
|
Choice Investments, Inc. and Donald Arthur Itzen (Principal) AWC/2007007159701/April 2009 Acting through Itzen, Choice
Choice issued subsequent research reports that did not contain such disclosure. Choice Investments, Inc.: Censured; Fined $20,000 ($10,000 Jt/severl with Itzen) Donald Arthur Itzen (Principal): Fined $10,000 jt/sev with Choice; Suspended 20 business days in Principal capacity only. |
|
James Stanley Gossett AWC/2007008653501/February 2009 Gossett made unsuitable investment recommendations to public customers, in that they were inconsistent with each customer’s financial situation, investment objective, circumstances and needs. In verbal and written communications with customers, Gossett made misleading or unwarranted claims about his investment strategy, particularly regarding investment risks, and made predictions or projections of the future performance of the strategy without providing a sound basis for evaluating his assertions. Gossett prepared and distributed to prospective customers sales literature about his investment strategy that failed to include risk disclosures and provided misleading information about past performance; provided incomplete and/or misleading information to customers about the performance of their investments and/or the account balance; and prepared an account statement for a customer in which he did not report all of the customer’s account holdings and thus reported an account balance that was greater than actual. Gossett exercised discretion in firm customer accounts without the customers’ prior written authorization and his member firm’s prior written acceptance. Gossett enlisted the service of a non-registered individual to solicit investors to open accounts with Gossett, promote Gossett’s investment strategy, assist customers with completing application forms and serve as Gossett’s primary point of contact. As compensation for the services, Gossett agreed to pay the individual half of the commissions he generated from trades in the customers’ accounts. In addition, Gossett opened a securities brokerage account with another FINRA member without providing written notice to his member firm and without advising the other firm of his association with a member firm; failed to disclose the account to his member firm after he opened the account; and failed to provide written notice to his member firm that he was engaged in an outside business activity. In response to a request for information, Gossett knowingly provided false and misleading information. James Stanley Gossett: Barred |
| Bill Singer's Comment: Awesome!!! Just re-print this case and send it around the office. It's a blueprint of nearly everything NOT to do. If this were a pinball game, we would have hit all the bumpers, gotten all the bonuses, and won a free ball at the end -- except, this isn't a game and, in the end, Gossett got barred. Not much of a prize. |
|
First Dallas Securities, Inc. and Eric Jay Marshall (Principal) AWC/2007007161501/January 2009 The Firm permitted Marshall
The Firm and Marshall provided a subject company with a draft copy of a research report that contained prohibited information before the report was published. Acting through Marshall, the Firm issued research reports that failed to disclose that Marshall and/or a member of his household had a financial interest in the securities of the subject company and the nature of the financial interest. The Firm failed to
The Firm's research reports did not include clear, comprehensive and prominent disclosures regarding whether it or any of its affiliates, officers or employees held interests in the subject companies’ securities. Eric Jay Marshall: Fined $10,000 jt/sev with Firm and an additional $5,428.07 (includes $428.07 in disgorged trading profits; Suspended 15 days as a research analyst |
| Bill Singer's Comment: Years and years after the massive research rules overhaul and firms and folks still can't get it right. If you're still in doubt, go read NASD Rule 2711. Research Analysts and Research Reports. |