The One with King, Trout, and Legacy

Randy King, his son Matthew King, and Andrea Trout founded and ran The Legacy Group, Inc. a real estate investment firm based in Colorado Springs. The firm’s business model was to provide mezzanine loans to real estate projects. These Legacy mezzanine loans would be junior to the secured mortgage loans on the project. 

Legacy raised its capital to make these mezzanine loans from over 200 investors in dozens of states. The investors would purchase notes that were tied to a specific project.  

Unfortunately, as some projects would run into financial difficulty, Legacy would use the proceeds from selling the notes to help fund those projects, in addition to the projects the notes were intended to fund.

In some instances, Legacy mislead investor about the status of the projects. In one case, Legacy failed to tell incoming investors that project was in the middle of foreclosure proceeding with the senior lender. There are other instances where Legacy failed disclosed that there were other investors and loans in the ownership structure of an investment that would affect the investment.  

The notes did not say that funds from the notes could be used to make payments to the Kings and Trout, but Legacy paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to them. The firm also paid over $400 thousand in undisclosed origination fees to King and Trout when closing on an investment.  

The case shows the importance of (1) only putting investor funds into items allowed by the investment documents and (2) not paying fees to affiliates that are not permitted by the investment documents.

The defendants have consented to the judgements. 

Data Privacy Comes to Real Estate

New York City passed a law imposing specific requirements on real estate owners in the city. As buildings are becoming “smarter” landlords are collecting more data about the building coming in, moving around inside, and exiting from their buildings.

This is largely for good intentions. It makes the elevators more efficient. It makes the heating and cooling systems more efficient, reducing the carbon footprint of a building. It makes the building more secure.

But of course, this data could be used for bad acts. New York City’s Tenant Data Privacy Act is trying to limit the use of this data for bad purposes.

The law is limited to residential buildings in NYC. Even if that’s not applicable to you, it provides some good items for compliance officers to think about when it comes to property data privacy.

  • Consent. Building owners have to get tenants’ express consent “in writing or through a mobile [app]” before collecting certain data from tenants.
  • Privacy policy. Building owners need a “plain language” privacy policy to tenants that discloses how data is collected and how it used.
  • Safeguards. Building owners must implement security measures to protect tenants’ data and the data of any other users of the smart access system.
  • Data destruction. Building owners must destroy data in specified timelines.

As for the bas use of data, the law prevent apartment building owners from using the data to harass or evict a tenant.

Sources:

The One with Failing to Meet Investment Criteria

Knight Nguyen Investments raised millions from its retail investor clients to invest in securities that met the firm’s investment criteria: 

(a) always allocate “secured” capital to attract at least 10% returns, and would select entities 

(b) with taxable income to support returns and that often do over $10 million of revenue;  

(c) that are already making money and not dependent on investor funds; and  

(d) that have financials that have been audited by KNI.    

Instead, the firm put its clients into extremely risky investments that did not meet the stated investment criteria. Instead, the firm invested its clients’ capital into high risk or fraudulent companies that, in most cases, were owned, controlled, or associated with principals of the firm. 

One was investments in promissory notes issued by a Seychelles-based company that was purportedly involved in the purchase and sale of gold from a Lebanese refinery. The company later defaulted on the notes and the firm’s clients lost their capital.  

Another was a Florida bioscience company that purportedly held patents for peptides that have potential applications ranging from cancer and burn treatments to crop solutions. The investment was speculative and did not meet the investment criteria, because the company de minimis revenues, its financials were not audited, and it was not actually offering secured investments. 

A Texas widow lost her entire $30,000 retirement investment. A Nevada individual lost his entire $92,000 retirement portfolio. A Kansas veteran and military professor, who was months away from retirement, lost almost all of his $320,000 retirement savings. An Alabama retiree lost $105,000. A retiree in Houston who had been seriously injured at work, and feared she could never work again, was seeking safety and income from her investments. Instead, says the SEC, she lost her entire $75,000 retirement portfolio. The SEC mentions others who lost between $30,000 and $150,000 their retirement accounts.

There looked to be a lot of other shenanigans going on at the firm. The big one problem the SEC hung its charges on was how the actual investments differed from the promised investment criteria.

Sources:

The One with the Pre-IPO Shares

Peter Quartararo met with potential investors and told them that he had access to “pre-IPO” stock in Peloton, WeWork, and Airbnb.  

The first potential investor was an acquaintance that had done a favor for Mr. Quartararo. He offered to let the investor buy the shares in WeWork and AirBnB at his cost, with was less than $2.00. That investor wrote a check for $96,000 to Quartararo’s firm, Private Equity Solutions, with the notation “Stock Purchase IPO.” 

A few weeks later, Quartararo came back to this investor with access to pre-IPO shares in Peloton. That investor wrote a check for $71,000. That investor shared the opportunity with some friends and Mr. Quartararo also sold them some shares. In all, Quartararo raised $436,000 from this pool of investors. 

After Peloton and AirBnB had their public offerings of shares, the investors began asking for the shares to be sold and the profits sent to them. Mr. Quartararo kept putting them off.  

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Nassau County District Attorney, Mr. Quartararo never had access to the shares in those companies. Instead, Mr. Quartararo pocketed the cash and used it for personal purposes, including to buy a Maserati. 

If the investors had checked the BrokerCheck system, they would have seen that he was barred from acting as a stockbroker. The bar was imposed in 2013 because Mr. Quartararo stolen money from a client. He had a prior history of other misdeeds before  being barred.  

Sources:

The One That is a Hollywood Story

Zach Horwitz was struggling actor using the stage name “Zach Avery.” His IMDB entry lists him in minor parts in mostly bad movies. His biggest movie role is an uncredited part as a medic in Brad Pitt’s “Fury.” 

Mr. Horowitz couldn’t figure out how to get rich and famous, but he did hatch a plan to get rich.  

Mr. Horwitz told investors that he had acquired and distributed dozens of cheap films including titles such as “Active Measures,” “Ruin Me” and “Slasher Party.” He produced contracts signed by HBO or Netflix executives showing he was doing business with the streaming platforms. He paid great returns to his early investors.  

Those early investors were mostly college friends. Those friends  offered the opportunities to their friends and family members to enter into loans with Mr. Horowitz’s production company. That lead to larger investors making loans. 

One investor urged his partners to finance deals more films.  “This is the goose that lays the golden egg guys, lets just hope they keep coming month after month.”  He brushed off his partners’ annoyance at Mr. Horwitz for refusing to let them see his business records. “If anything not sending us financials proves to me even more that they are not desperate, they don’t need our money.” 

As you might expect, Mr. Horowitz was not sending financials because it was a massive fraud. The documents were fake. He had not purchased any films and had no connection to the streaming platforms for distribution. Those early returns to investors were paid with money received from later investors. The classic Ponzi scheme. 

Maybe he was a better actor than the studios gave him credit. He managed to raise $690 million dollars from investors by convincing them his production company was real. That must take some acting skill.  

It looks like Mr. Horowitz will end up famous for his fraud. Whatever riches he briefly held have evaporated as the fraud came to an end.  

Sources:

Compliance Bricks and Mortar for April 30

These are some of the compliance-related stories that recently caught my attention.


The Bizarre Case of Snowden and a Get-Rich-Quick Real Estate Investing Conference
Jack Poulson
Vice.com

Edward Snowden joined an online “elite real estate investment club” Saturday afternoon, spoke for several minutes about whistleblowing, called out one of the hosts for allegedly running a Ponzi scheme, then logged out in one of the more bizarre online conferences in recent memory.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/epndnz/the-bizarre-case-of-snowden-and-a-get-rich-quick-real-estate-investing-conference

Bitcoin, We Have a Problem
Matt Kelly
Radical Compliance

To be clear, Tesla made no inaccurate financial statements with this maneuver. But it did play fast and loose with a highly volatile asset (bitcoin) that gave the company a nice boost to the bottom line. Cynics would say Tesla came close to earnings management: it could see the value of bitcoin appreciating, and knew how much the company could sell to make up for any shortfalls that might exist on the operating side. 

Even if the price of bitcoin fell, Tesla still could have dumped the asset, and then booked the loss for a credit on tax liability. Heads it wins one way; tails it wins another. 

https://www.radicalcompliance.com/2021/04/27/bitcoin-we-have-a-problem/

FinCEN Commences Rulemaking Process for Implementation of Corporate Transparency Act Requiring Disclosure of Beneficial Ownership Information
Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP

On April 5, 2021, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a bureau of the United States Department of the Treasury (“FinCEN” and “Treasury,” respectively) issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (“ANPRM”) beginning the process of implementing regulations under the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”). Enacted by Congress on Dec. 31, 2020, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act, the CTA requires certain companies created or registered to do business in the United States (each, a “Reporting Company”) to report certain identifying information, such as beneficial owners of 25% or more and certain control persons, directly to FinCEN. That information is to be held in a non-public database maintained by FinCEN and will be shared with law enforcement and federal regulators, among others. The reporting obligations discussed herein will only take effect upon the promulgation of final regulations by FinCEN, which FinCEN is required to issue by Jan. 1, 2022. The ANPRM is the first step in this rulemaking process and requests public comment on numerous questions relevant to the implementation of the CTA. Comments are due May 5, 2021.

https://www.srz.com/resources/fincen-commences-rulemaking-process-for-implementation-of.html

A rising actor, fake HBO deals and one of Hollywood’s most audacious Ponzi schemes
Michael Finnegan
Los Angeles Times

“This is the goose that lays the golden egg guys, lets just hope they keep coming month after month,” Yeghnazary wrote, suggesting they “ride this baby out as long as we can.” He brushed off Russell’s annoyance at Horwitz for refusing to let them see his business records.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-04-23/zachary-horwitz-hollywood-film-ponzi-scheme

New SEC Enforcement Director Alex Oh Resigns, Agency Says
Dave Michaels
Wall Street Journal

The new enforcement chief for the Securities and Exchange Commission resigned after just a few days on the job, the agency said Wednesday, following a judge’s questioning of her conduct in a lawsuit involving Exxon Mobil Corp.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-sec-enforcement-director-alex-oh-resigns-agency-says-11619644474

The One With the Lack of Write-Downs

I think many frauds start with a failure to recognize mistakes. Yes, it’s hard to tell your investors that you lost some of their money. It makes it harder to attract new investors and additional investments. It gets really hard to do that when you go to jail.

Martin Silver was the co-founder, managing partner, and chief operating officer of the International Advisory Group LLC. The firm was an investment adviser that specialized in trade finance lending—risky loans to small- and medium-sized companies in emerging markets. The firm also sponsored three private funds to invest in the trade finance loans.

One of the funds had assets of about $300 million. The firm learned that a South American coffee producer had defaulted on a $30 million loan. Fearing that existing investors would flee the fund and that ongoing fundraising efforts would suffer if the loss were disclosed, Silver decided to conceal the loss by incorrectly valuing the loan on the fund’s books. Later, he replaced the defaulted the loan with fake loans to prop up the value of the fund after auditor inquiries.

Then, a second loan in the fund’s portfolio defaulted. Silver continued his actions of not writing down the value of the loan and eventually replacing it with fake loans.

Eventually, faced with liquidity demands for redemptions, Silver formed the second and third funds to buy the fake loans from the initial fund. Eventually, the schemes collapsed and charges were brought.

Of course the scheme collapsed. You can never find the out-sized returns to make up for the big loss.

Mr. Silver pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit investment adviser fraud, securities fraud, and wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison; one count of securities fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, and one count of wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Sources:

Compliance Bricks and Mortar for April 23

These are some of the compliance-related stories that recently caught my attention.


Alex Oh Named SEC Director of Enforcement

Washington D.C., April 22, 2021 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that Alex Oh has been appointed Director of the Division of Enforcement. Oh was most recently a partner at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and co-chair of the law firm’s Anti-Corruption & FCPA Practice Group. She was previously an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, where she was a member of the Securities & Commodities Fraud Task Force and the Major Crimes Unit.


Wirecard employees removed millions in cash using shopping bags
Olaf Storbeck
Financial Times

The practice started as early as 2012, and six-digit amounts of banknotes were often moved in Aldi and Lidl plastic bags, former employees told the police. The total amount, the current whereabouts of the cash and the purpose of removing it from the building are unclear. Wirecard, whose main business was processing payments for merchants, owned its own bank but did not have branches. As demand for cash grew over time, Wirecard Bank bought a safe which was located in the group’s headquarters in a Munich suburb.

https://www.ft.com/content/31a8ed93-f602-47f0-9120-4b4f152ec7bc

Former Goldman Analyst Barred by Finra for Insider Trading
Bloomberg Law

Maguire bought shares in two companies through undisclosed accounts after seeing internal emails that showed the analyst covering the stocks was raising his ratings from “neutral” to “buy,” according to a Tuesday statement from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Maguire made the purchases in April and June 2020, after the upgrades were approved internally but before research reports announcing the changes were published.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/securities-law/ex-goldman-research-analyst-barred-by-finra-for-insider-trading

Petitioner asks SEC to clarify when NFTs are securities, recommends NFT rulemaking
John Filar Atwood
Jim Hamilton’s World of Securities Regulation

Like initial coin offerings (ICOs) before them, non-fungible tokens (NFTs) have grown in popularity very quickly, and Arkonis Capital believes it is now time for the SEC to step in and provide guidance on whether NFTs are securities. In a rulemaking petition, Arkonis said that a concept release on how to regulate NFTs is a meaningful first step in providing guidance, but that it would only prove beneficial if it is followed by an SEC rulemaking on the regulation of NFTs.

https://jimhamiltonblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/petitioner-asks-sec-to-clarify-when.html

The Flu Vanished During Covid. What Will Its Return Look Like? 
Keith Collins
New York Times


Withdrawal of No Action Letters

In connection with Securities and Exchange Commission’s new Marketing Rule, I’m expecting the SEC to withdraw a bunch of the no-action letters that address advertising by registered investment advisers. For example, the Clover no-action letter doesn’t seem to fit with the new Marketing Rule and will likely have to be withdrawn to avoid confusion.

The release for the Marketing Rule stated so.

Additionally, pursuant to the staff’s review, the staff will be withdrawing the staff’s remaining no-action letters and other staff guidance, or portions thereof, as of the compliance date of the final rules. [832]

https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020-28868/p-1389

That footnote 832 said: “A list of the letters to be withdrawn will be available on the Commission’s website.

That website now exists: https://www.sec.gov/divisions/investment/im-modified-withdrawn-staff-statements

Or maybe it already existed and I never noticed that page on the SEC’s website before before. It looks new to me and the vast majority of the withdrawal dates are from the past year and moving forward.

However, there are no withdrawal notices for investment adviser marketing yet. I assume there will be a bigger announcement when it happens.

Sources:

Compliance Bricks and Mortar for April 16

These are some of the compliance-related stories that recently caught my attention.


U.S. Senate votes 53-45 to confirm Gary Gensler as Biden’s SEC chief
Katanga Johnson
Reuters

“Gary Gensler has the perfect mix of market expertise, regulatory experience and commitment to the public interest to be an outstanding SEC Chairman,” said Barbara Roper, chief investor advocate at Washington-based Consumer Federation of America.

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-senate-votes-53-45-confirm-gary-gensler-bidens-sec-chief-2021-04-14/

Is Your Compliance Program Consumed by Process Rather Than Outcomes?
Duncan Milne
SCCE’s The Compliance & Ethics Blog

This approach significantly reduces the impact of the compliance program – senior management and the wider business can then view the compliance function as one of form over substance and a purely administrative cost center – something they are required to have rather than something they actually need. Or worse still, something that actually impedes business performance rather than enhancing it. It can be demotivating to compliance teams, generating endless content that nobody ends up reading, with any valuable insights getting lost in the trees.

https://complianceandethics.org/is-your-compliance-program-consumed-by-process-rather-than-outcomes/

SEC Accuses Actor of $690 Million Fraud Based on Fake Netflix Deal
Matt Robinson
Bloomberg

Zachary Horwitz never made it big on the Sunset Strip — there was the uncredited part in Brad Pitt’s “Fury” and a host of roles in low-budget thrillers and horror flicks. But federal charges suggest he had acting talent, duping several financial firms out of hundreds of millions of dollars and enabling him to live the Hollywood dream after all.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-07/actor-s-690-million-fraud-based-on-fake-netflix-deal-sec-says

Division of Examinations issues ESG Risk Alert
Rodney F. Tonkovic, J.D.
Jim Hamilton’s World of Securities Regulation

The SEC’s Division of Examinations has issued a risk alert highlighting its recent observations from exams of firms offering ESG products and services. The alert gives the Division’s observations of deficiencies and internal control weaknesses derived from examinations of ESG investing by advisers and funds.

https://jimhamiltonblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/division-of-examinations-issues-esg.html