For Public Investors

Labor Department Proposes New Rule Imposing Fiduciary Duty on Brokers

April 15, 2015 | By Jessica A. Murzyn

In what has become a hot issue this Spring, the Labor Department yesterday proposed a new set of standards for brokers who offer advice in connection with 401(k)’s and other retirement accounts. Currently, brokers are required only to recommend products that are “suitable” for investors, which permits the sale of products that earn the broker high fees. Reuters reports that the new standards will require brokers to put their clients’ best interests first ahead of any personal financial gain. The Labor Department proposal will require “best interest” contracts between brokers and investors.

Rich Intelisano and Katz LLP represents investors in FINRA arbitrations and other litigations against broker-dealers and other financial firms.

Concern Mounts Over the Lack of a Rule Imposing a Fiduciary Duty on Brokers

April 10, 2015 | By Jessica A. Murzyn

I noted in my March 20 post that the Chair of the SEC had just come out in favor of a rule requiring brokers to act in their clients best interests. While investors wait for the SEC to move forward on the issue, the New York City Comptroller, Scott Stringer, is proposing that New York State require brokers to disclose the present state of their relationship to clients – “I am not a fiduciary” and “I am not required to act in your best interests, and am allowed to recommend investments that may earn higher fees for me or my firm, even if those investments may not have the best combination of fees, risks and expected returns for you.” The Wall Street Journal posited that New York’s adoption of such a requirement could spur other states to impose similar regulations.

A recent report by the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association (“PIABA”) shows why Stringer’s proposal is critical. U.S. News describes the PIABA report which contrasted brokers’ advertising campaigns with the legal positions taken by those brokers in litigation against their clients. For example:

• Ad: “It’s time for a financial strategy that puts your needs and priorities front and center.”

SEC Chair Hints that the Commission Is Considering Rule on Fiduciary Duty for Brokers

March 20, 2015 | By Jessica A. Murzyn

Reuters reported that Mary Jo White, Chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, came out in favor of creating of new rules to harmonize standards of care between investment advisers and brokers. Currently, investment advisers must act in a client’s best interest, while brokers may continue to sell products that primarily benefit their or their firm’s financial interests – so long as such products are “suitable” for the clients.

Wall Street has opposed efforts by the Department of Labor to craft rules governing such broker conduct and requiring them to put client’s interest first. White’s comments this week suggest that the SEC may be preparing to weigh in on the issue.

Rich Intelisano and Katz LLP represents investors in FINRA arbitrations and other proceedings against both investment advisers and brokers.

Morgan Stanley Likely Will Face Lawsuit by New York Attorney General Related to its Mortgage Bonds; Reaches Agreement to Settle Federal Mortgage Claims

March 5, 2015 | By Jessica A. Murzyn

Reuters reports that Morgan Stanley’s annual 10-K, filed March 2, 2015, indicates that the New York Attorney General intends to file a lawsuit related to 30 subprime securitizations sponsored by the company. This follows lawsuits and similar allegations by attorneys general in California, Virginia and Illinois. The New York Attorney General indicated that the lawsuit would allege that Morgan Stanley misrepresented or omitted material information related to the due diligence, underwriting and valuation of loans and properties. In the 10-K, Morgan Stanley stated that it does not agree with the allegations.

Morgan Stanley also reached a $2.6 billion agreement in principle last month with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California to resolve claims related to what it called “residential mortgage matters.”

It remains to be seen whether investors will reap any of the benefits of these government actions seeking to mend the damage done by the subprime mortgage crisis and the proliferation of mortgage-backed securities (MBS), residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS), and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs).

Master Limited Partnerships: Unsuitable for Some Investors?

March 3, 2015 | By Ross B. Intelisano

Are master limited partners unsuitable for some investors? The term master limited partnership sounds like a complicated legal transaction. In fact, master limited partnerships or MLPs are complex investments that have become hugely popular in the last few years in this low interest rate environment. MLPs are tax exempt publicly traded companies that often own infrastructure in the energy field (pipelines, tanks, etc.). Individual and small institutional investors having be loading up on MLPs because they pay a large percentage of their income out to shareholders as distributions. According to Morningstar, investors added almost $12 billion in 2014 into mutual and exchange-traded funds which invest in MLPs. That’s a huge amount of hard earned money looking for higher yields. The question is, do investors understand the real risks? We doubt it.

Brokers commonly market MLPs as low risk, higher yield securities. But that’s not the case. An MLP is a publicly traded limited partnership with two types of partners: the general partner (or GP) who is responsible for managing the MLP and is compensated for performance; and the limited partner (or LP) who is the investor who provides the capital to the MLP and receives periodic income distributions. Unlike most partnerships, shares of MLPs can be bought or sold on a stock exchange. Just like any partnership, the problem with being a limited partner is that an LP has no role in the management of MLP. That’s risk number one.

Risk number two is that most MLPs invest in the natural resources infrastructure. This is normally a risky space, especially with the swings on energy and commodity prices.

Securities Arbitration Award Against Merrill Lynch Upheld

February 19, 2015 | By Ross B. Intelisano

This week, the New Jersey Supreme Court denied the appeal of an arbitration award against Merrill Lynch by the Associated Humane Societies Inc. of Tinton Falls, N.J. In the original FINRA arbitration, the society alleged that certain of its investments were improper, it improperly sustained penalties and other charges when the investments were liquidated, its accounts were improperly managed and churned, and it was overcharged for management of its accounts. The society sought $10 million in punitive damages, $872,171 in compensatory damages and $544,299 in attorneys’ fees. After an 18-day hearing, the FINRA panel found in favor of the society, but awarded it only $168,103 in compensatory damages and $126,077 in punitives.

The society appealed. A 3-judge appellate division panel upheld the award in October, finding that the FINRA panel did not abuse its discretion. Associated Humane Societies, Inc. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., No. L-4376-13 (Oct. 29, 2014). The New Jersey Supreme Court denied any further appeal on Feb. 17, 2015.

Though the society was ultimately disappointed with the size of the award, the decision shows the reluctance of courts to disturb FINRA arbitration awards.

Brokers Must Consider New Market Realities When Determining the Suitability of Asset Allocation for Young Investors

February 19, 2015 | By Ross B. Intelisano

Does the conventional wisdom regarding asset allocation hold up in today’s economy? The New York Times recently featured an article suggesting that a portfolio teeming with risky stocks, derivatives, and other exotic investments may, in fact, not be suitable for even young investors. The Times points out that these young investors experience higher rates of unemployment and are more likely to cash out their 401(k)’s and other investments when they switch jobs. An appropriate suitability analysis under FINRA Rule 2111 would take these factors into account. It is highly likely that many brokers are still using a one-size-fits-all asset allocation formula for their young customers.

Investors may have a variety of claims against such brokers who fail to take into account current market conditions, including unsuitable investment advice, fraudulent misrepresentations and omissions, and failure to supervise.

SEC & FINRA Order RMK to Pay $200M for Bond Funds

June 22, 2011 | By Ross B. Intelisano

Below is FINRA’s press release of the $200M restitution order the SEC and FINRA levied on Regions Morgan Keegan (RMK) related to bond funds it misrepresented to investors. Big for investors. We had blogged about this in April 2010 when the SEC charged Morgan Keegan & Company, Morgan Asset Management and two employees with fraudulently overstating the value of securities backed by subprime mortgages. These were the first federal government allegations related to the Regions Morgan Keegan bond funds which lost significant value in 2008. Many law firms around the U.S., including our firm, have been retained by investors who lost money in the Regions Morgan Keegan funds. Big fight will be to get fines into evidence during the pending arbitrations.

Morgan Keegan Ordered to Pay $200 Million to Investors to Settle Allegations Regarding Sales of Bond Funds Sales Materials Made Exaggerated Claims and Failed to Disclose Risks; Supervisory System Failures

WASHINGTON – The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and five state regulators from Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee announced today that each has settled enforcement proceedings against Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc. Morgan Keegan will pay restitution of $200 million for customers who invested in seven affiliated bond funds, including the Regions Morgan Keegan Select Intermediate Bond Fund (Intermediate Fund). Morgan Keegan’s affiliate, Morgan Asset Management, managed the funds.

Reuters Quote by Ross Intelisano on Securities Fraud

May 16, 2011 | By Ross B. Intelisano

Below is an interesting Reuters piece by Matt Goldstein which quotes Ross Intelisano regarding securities fraud and Ponzi schemes.

Special Report: A fame-seeking Philly trader’s rap falls flat Photo Thu, May 12 2011

By Matthew Goldstein

Rich & Intelisano Wins Punitive Damages Award

February 7, 2011 | By Ross B. Intelisano

Rich & Intelisano recently won a FINRA arbitration award which included $100,000 in punitive damages. The case is Stora, et al. v. Strasbourger, Pearson et al. (FINRA 09-01769). We represented a group of investors who were defrauded by a broker dealer and its registered representatives. Matthew Woodruff of our office tried the matter which included five hearing sessions. The panel awarded the claimants $373,968 in compensatory damages, plus interest. The award is significant because pursuant to the Mastrobuono Supreme Court decision, the panel awarded claimants $100,000 in punitive damages, a rarity in securities arbitrations.