Enforcement Actions
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
CASES OF NOTE
2011
NOTE: Stipulations of Fact 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 & to the entry of findings. Additionally, for AWCs, if FINRA has reason to believe a violation has occurred and the member or associated person does not dispute the violation, FINRA may prepare and request that the member or associated person execute a letter accepting a finding of violation, consenting to the imposition of sanctions, and agreeing to waive such member's or associated person's right to a hearing before a hearing panel, and any right of appeal to the National Adjudicatory Council, the SEC, and the courts, or to otherwise challenge the validity of the letter, if the letter is accepted. The letter shall describe the act or practice engaged in or omitted, the rule, regulation, or statutory provision violated, and the sanction or sanctions to be imposed.
December 2011
Corinne A. Perrone
AWC/2010024718001/December 2011
Perrone instructed a bank teller under her supervision, while acting as a bank branch manager, to process a withdrawal of $2,500 from her personal savings account, knowing the account had insufficient funds to cover the withdrawal, but misrepresented to the teller that the account belonged to one of her customers. When the teller discovered that the account had a $5 balance, Perrone falsely claimed that the customer would be making a deposit into the account in the near future, and Perrone performed an override on the account. The teller processed the transaction and gave Perrone $2,500 in cash.

Perrone forged a relativeís name on a signature card, opened a checking account in her relativeís name at another bank branch, traveled to another bank branch and instructed a bank teller, whom she formerly supervised, to process a withdrawal of $6,500 from that account, without her relativeís knowledge or authorization. Perrone knew the account had insufficient funds to cover the withdrawal but misrepresented to the teller that the account belonged to one of her customers. When the teller discovered that the account had a $25 balance, Perrone falsely advised him that she had just completed a wire transfer deposit into the account for the customer and that it would take a few minutes to appear on the system. After the teller processed the $6,500 withdrawal, Perrone directed him to give her $2,500 in cash and to deposit the remaining $4,000 into a checking account her relative legitimately owned. 
Corinne A. Perrone: Barred
Tags:  Bank    NSF     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
October 2011
Andrew Joseph Longoria
2009019969101/October 2011

A firm customer opened an account with a mutual fund company through Longoria and,acting on Longoriaís instructions, wrote a check to an entity Longoria owned for $12,000 to fund the account. However, Longoria never funded the account and did not return the $12,000 to the customer.

An individual, non-firm customer gave Longoria a check for $5,000 to invest in what Longoria had represented was an exchange traded mutual fund whose performance was tied to that of the Standard and Poor Index. Longoria instructed the individual to make the check payable to the entity he owned. The individual completed and signed forms to open an account, but no account was opened; the individual requested copies of the forms and evidence of the investment, but Longoria did not provide these documents to the individual. The individual repeatedly asked Longoria to return his $5,000; Longoria promised to do so, and eventually gave the individual a check for $5,820, but the check was returned for insufficient funds.

Longoria failed to respond to FINRA requests for information.

Andrew Joseph Longoria: Barred; Ordered to pay $5,000 plus interest restitution to a non-customer
Tags:  Checks    NSF     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Bryan Lee Addington
2010021774001/October 2011

A customer instructed Addington to purchase shares of a common stock in his account at Addingtonís member firm. Addington placed an order to purchase the stock and instructed the customer to write a check in the amount of $34,019 made payable to an entity to pay for the purchase.  However, Addington did not credit the payment to the customerís account.  As a result, Addington's brokerage firm liquidated the shares of the stock in the customerís account for non-payment.

The customer did not promptly learn of the liquidating transaction and instructed Addington to sell the shares of the stock he believed was still in his account. The customer received a $35,500.98 check from Addington drawn on the entityís account which Addington signed; however, when the customer deposited the check in his account, it was dishonored for insufficient funds.

After the customer called Addington and demanded that he repay him; Addington then paid the customer $35,000 in cash. In addition, Addington failed to respond to FINRA requests for information in connection with FINRAís investigation of the allegations in the Form U5 his firm filed.

Bryan Lee Addington : Barred
Tags:  Checks    NSF     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
August 2011
Richard Annichiarico
OS/2009019439101/August 2011

Annichiarico wrote personal checks while knowing that there were insufficient funds to cover them. Annichiarico wrote each of the checks to himself and deposited them via automatic teller machine (ATM), in amounts ranging from $100 to $1,000, to create a provisional credit in his own bank account which he used to withdraw cash via ATM. The checks returned for insufficient funds totaled $5,380.

Annichiaricoís account was cured by subsequent deposits and was assessed returned check fees, which were paid.

Annichiarico failed to timely respond to FINRA requests for information and documents.

Richard Annichiarico : Suspended 1 year; No fine in light of financial status.
Tags:  NSF     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Bill Singer's Comment
Really?  You get suspended for one year for NSF checks that you subsequently cover?  And what, exactly, is the threshold over which this fairly common problem becomes a FINRA regulatory concern?  Seems to me there's quite a bit of dangerous ad hoc consideration at play here.  Notwithstanding, if Annichiarico failed to timely respond to FINRA, then that may better explain the 1 year suspension, however, there's more than a bit of a double standard at play here.  When the wirehouses mismanaged their affairs to the extent that they bordered on (or became) insolvent -- AND when the US government had to essentially bail out Wall Street's big boys, that didn't exactly result in a slew of suspensions and fines upon the responsible CEO and managers.  Not sure that I fully appreciate the difference between writing an NSF check that you cover and running a brokerage firm into the ground and then begging for a bailout.
May 2011
Michael Jon Davies
OS/2009020069601/May 2011
Davies engaged in a pattern of check-kiting, in which he wrote checks totaling $1,070 from his personal bank checking account, maintained at another bank and payable to himself, deposited the checks into another personal checking account of his that was maintained at his firmís bank affiliate, even though he knew or should have known that he had insufficient funds in his account maintained at the other bank to cover the checks, and then immediately withdrew these funds via automatic teller machine (ATM) from that checking account at his firmís bank. Each of the checks was subsequently returned for insufficient funds.
Michael Jon Davies : Fined $5,000; Suspended 6 months
Tags:  Check Kiting    ATM    Bank    NSF     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
April 2011
Janet A. McDermott (Supervisor)
AWC/2010022100601/April 2011

McDermott effected transactions, including checks, debits and automatic teller machine (ATM) withdrawals, in the aggregate amount of approximately $11,403 on her personal account at her member firmís subsidiary, for which she did not have sufficient funds. McDermott opened a personal account at the subsidiary from where she began effecting transactions in amounts that she knew, or should have known, exceeded her available balance. This pattern continued, with McDermott causing transactions to occur on her account without sufficient funds until her account showed a month-ending deficit of $4,756, which included non-sufficient funds (NSF) charges of $2,130. The write-offs in the amount of $1,056 and a deposit of $3,700 reduced the deficit in her account to zero.

During a second period, McDermott again effected transactions on the account when she knew, or should have known, she had insufficient funds to cover the transactions. She failed to make a single deposit during this time to pay for the transactions, which caused her account to have a deficit of $7,049, which included NSF charges of $430.

McDermott's firm terminated her employment as a result of her conduct.

Janet A. McDermott (Supervisor): Barred
Tags:  ATM    NSF     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Bill Singer's Comment
I'm not defending McDermott's conduct but I am a bit puzzled as to how this becomes a FINRA regulatory issue.  I mean, seriously, at what point does a given number of bounced checks put you on notice that you will be barred from the securities industry?  Does that also apply to an employer member firm that pays you with a rubber check or starts to stiff its suppliers?  Assumiong that McDermott had opened her account at a third-party Bank -- not a subsidiary of her member firm -- would anyone at FINRA have cared about the NSF check situation?
February 2011
Randie Jill Sanford
AWC/2007011320901/February 2011

Sanford wrote personal checks against a number of her accounts maintained at her member firm while she knew, or should have known, that she had insufficient funds to cover payment on the checks. The checks were linked to her financial management account, addressed to herself and in response to or preceded by the firmís giving her notice that she had to deposit funds to cover checks on a margin call. In almost each instance, after receiving notice that she had to deposit funds into one of her accounts, Sanford responded by writing and depositing an insufficient funds check into that account, and then writing additional checks or effecting account transfers to prevent the first check from being dishonored. Sanford wrote checks from an account she knew, or should have known, had a negative balance, and deposited them into the same account resulting in an inflated account balance; the amount of the insufficient funds checks totaled an aggregate of approximately $109,000.

Sanford willfully failed to disclose material information on her Form U4.

Randie Jill Sanford : Fined $5,000; Suspended 8 months
Tags:  NSF    Margin     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Enforcement Actions
Tags
Email Bill Singer Connect with Bill Singer on Facebook Follow Bill Singer on Twitter Link up with Bill Singer on LinkedIn Join Bill Singer on Google+