Representing investors, financial professionals, whistleblowers, witnesses
and commercial clients around THE US and the world since 1999
Recognized in the Industry
Badge - AV Preeminent 2020
Badge - Best Attorneys of America
Super Lawyers
Badge - Badge - Avvo Rating 10.0 Top Attorney
Martindale-Hubbell Client Reviewed
Expertise - Best Employment Lawyers in New York City
Avvo Reviews
NYC Bar Association

It has been difficult to not hear about the recent events surrounding MF Global Holdings Ltd and former Senator and New Jersey Governor, John Corzine. However, many investors do not really understand what happened or why. A recent article in Forbes Online titled “MF Global: Were the Risks Clear?” helps to break down just how these events transpired. The article details how overexposure to European sovereign debt (government bonds) leveraged by using borrowed money (called “margin”) coupled with declines in the value of those bonds caused the downfall of the fund.

The almost overnight collapse of such a prominent and public investment fund as MF Global has brought many issues to light, and the Forbes article characterizes this “as the latest reminder to investors that it’s important – and sometimes very difficult – to understand the entire spectrum of risk they’re exposed to.” These events also raise many questions that should be asked by investors, such as “Do I really understand how my advisor is managing my savings?” and “Have the risks in my portfolio been adequately explained to me?”.

Many investors in MF Global have said that they did not understand what their money was being invested into, but rather trusted that the firm would do the right thing by them. One investor cited by the article said on his blog that “I am supposed to know the difference between an ethical operator and one that is not. The truth is that it often is very difficult to tell them apart.” This has unfortunately come to be a fairly common sentiment by many individual investors, in reference to their personal broker and the funds they invested in.

Malecki Law announces the filing of a civil arbitration complaint in excess of $4 million, plus punitive damages, against MetLife Securities, Inc. The case is being filed with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) today for alleged improper supervision and selling away, relating to an alleged Ponzi scheme that devastated a Bronx community. The complaint alleges that the firm failed to properly supervise and maintain the compliance of one of their registered representatives, Mr. Robert H. Van Zandt, in violation of federal and state securities laws, as well as financial industry rules and regulations. Robert H. Van Zandt is apparently already under investigation by the New York State Attorney General’s Office. “I believe there are a lot of victims out there who don’t know what is going on, nor their rights under the rules and regulations of the securities industry,” securities fraud attorney Jenice Malecki indicates.

In November of this year FINRA and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission jointly released Regulatory Notice 11-54 stressing the importance of supervision over registered representatives. Shortly before the release of Regulatory Notice 11-54, FINRA filed a regulatory action against Merrill Lynch and fined the firm $1 million for failing to properly supervise a registered representative and catch a Ponzi scheme that he was running out of a San Antonio, Texas branch office that victimized clients and non-clients of Merrill Lynch, all to which Merrill Lynch was responsible for its failure to supervise.

The complaint filed by Malecki Law relates to the alleged conduct of Robert H. Van Zandt of the Van Zandt Agency, who is believed to have sold unregistered securities in the form of promissory notes that were represented to prospective investors as part of a secured real estate investment, which appears improperly set up and not secured at all. It is alleged that these notes were part of yet another “Ponzi” scheme in what Ms. Malecki opines to be “an era filled with ponzi schemes for which the industry should closely monitor to avoid harm to unwitting victims,” this alleged ponzi scheme one run through a series of shell companies including Burke and Grace Avenue Corp.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has in recent weeks seemingly broadened its pursuit of wrongdoers by filing cases against defendants on the charge of negligence alone. Negligence can be defined as a situation in which one should have known that information given to investors was inadequate. In recent years, negligence fines have been what accused bigwigs would accept and pay to avoid more severe charges of fraud, which carry heavy costs and the potential to be banned from the finance industry. Such admissions were usually made out of court and out the public eye. Readers looking to learn more about the role of negligence in securities law proceedings can visit our firm’s informational Practice Areas and Investors sections.

As of today, these ramped-up regulations have been sparsely utilized, though the Wall Street Journal speculates that more actions against negligence are forthcoming. It’s the SEC’s recently united “Structured and New-Products Enforcement” unit that’s claiming to be newly insistent about information being more fairly provided to investors.

Criticism of the SEC’s post-2008 methods has come in part because they have seemingly failed to catch many financial criminals in the act. Detractors believe that in many cases, outright fraud or recklessness is the issue: branding such failures as negligence would then only diminish or downplay their severity. The penalties for fraud are far more severe, but are in turn more challenging to obtain, as they require proof of intentional malfeasance. The charge of “Recklessness” falls between fraud and negligence in severity, and can be defined as one turning a blind eye to potentially harmful activity.

Malecki Law is currently investigating Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brokerage firms who have advised customers to purchase leveraged and inverse ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds), including those issued by Direxion, ProFunds (ProShares) and Rydex. Some of these ETFs trade under the symbols FAS, FAZ, UPRO, SDOW, SPXU, UDOW, RSU and RSU, among many others.

From 2007 through 2010, the market for inverse and leveraged ETFs such as these has grown from $1 billion to $30 billion, in large part due to these products being solicited in the accounts of normal, unsophisticated investors.

These products are highly complex, using various trading strategies in an attempt to deliver their promised returns, and are oftentimes not suitable for the investment portfolio of a conservative or retired investor.

Malecki Law takes a proactive and informed approach to the financial news of today: actively engaging in fact-finding analysis on prospective cases from around the world. Our thorough knowledge of securities law’s history and fine points makes us ideal consultants for investors who have suffered losses due to misadvice from their broker or other financial counsel. Information on a selection of funds and companies currently under investigation by Malecki Law can be found below. Our pursuit of excellence is constant, but our opportunities to make lasting positive change to the securities industry begin and end with determined clients who seek justice.

Malecki Law is currently investigating the potential for recovery of losses from Citigroup’s FALCON and ASTA-MAT hedge funds, as sold by its broker-dealer Smith Barney in the years spanning from 2005 to 2008. It is alleged that Citigroup presented the funds as affordable options, with fair-to-little risk and low volatility.

If the group failed to disclose crucial information about dangerous aspects of the funds and potential for severe losses, a claim may be warranted. Both funds were increasingly and excessively invested in real estate, leading to both funds reporting upward of 80% losses in 2008. Investors’ legal claims against Citigroup have included but are not limited to Fraud, Failure to Supervise, Unsuitability, Misrepresentations & Omissions, Breach of Contract, and Breach of Fiduciary Duty.

Malecki Law takes a proactive and informed approach to the financial news of today: actively engaging in fact-finding analysis on prospective cases from around the world. Our thorough knowledge of securities law’s history and fine points makes us ideal consultants for investors who have suffered losses due to misadvice from their broker or other financial counsel. Information on a selection of funds and companies currently under investigation by Malecki Law can be found below. Our pursuit of excellence is constant, but our opportunities to make lasting positive change to the securities industry begin and end with determined clients who seek justice.

Malecki Law is currently investigating the potential for recovery of losses from 1861 Capital municipal bond arbitrage funds sold by brokerage firm UBS. 1861 Capital Management is an investment firm based in New York, NY. It has been alleged that 1861 Capital Discovery Domestic Fund, LP was marketed and sold by UBS and other broker dealers as a sound and secure addition to a portfolio of municipal bonds. It may be more accurate to say, however, that 1861 would be better described as a leveraged municipal arbitrage fund.

In marketing such funds to investors, it has been alleged that UBS and their peers sought investors who were not only wealthy, but also cautious: those avoiding risk, making slow-but-steady investments, who would be drawn to the tax free municipal bonds to which the leveraged fund was coupled.

Malecki Law takes a proactive and informed approach to the financial news of today: actively engaging in fact-finding analysis on prospective cases from around the world. Our thorough knowledge of securities law’s history and fine points makes us ideal consultants for investors who have suffered losses due to misadvice from their broker or other financial counsel. Information on a selection of funds and companies currently under investigation by Malecki Law can be found below. Our pursuit of excellence is constant, but our opportunities to make lasting positive change to the securities industry begin and end with determined clients who seek justice.

Malecki Law is currently investigating the potential for recovery of losses from reverse convertible securities. Reverse convertible notes can be defined as complex, short-term bonds. At the end of one year, the owner receives either a 100% return on their investment or a predetermined amount of stock should the value of the note drop by a set figure (typically 70-80%). Their high-interest rates (recently set at as much as 13%) make them an alluring prospect for quick and significant gains.

Such notes are widely discussed in the finance industry today, both because of their popularity ($6.76 billion worth of reverse convertibles were sold in the U.S. in 2010) and because of growing concerns that the industry is selling such notes to unsuitable investors, and failing to supervise investments properly once funds have been transferred. RCNs have thus received increased regulatory attention from FINRA and other regulators.

Malecki Law takes a proactive and informed approach to the financial news of today: actively engaging in fact-finding analysis on prospective cases from around the world. Our thorough knowledge of securities law’s history and fine points makes us ideal consultants for investors who have suffered losses due to misadvice from their broker or other financial counsel. Information on a selection of funds and companies currently under investigation by Malecki Law can be found below. Our pursuit of excellence is constant, but our opportunities to make lasting positive change to the securities industry begin and end with determined clients who seek justice.

Malecki Law is currently investigating the potential for recovery of losses in Desert Capital REIT, a Henderson, Nevada based real estate investor, and its co-owned brokerage firm CM Securities.

Desert Capital is a real estate investment trust (REIT) that is believed to have been financing short-term high interest mortgage loans. These types of loans and any dividends are believed to have been paid to investors through real estate transactions, and are today generally thought to be risky investments, with potential for high gains due to their interest rates, but with equal if not unwarranted potential for resolute failure, and a possible lack of accountability toward investors.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA“), issued a news release on October 4, 2011 announcing that it had fined the broker-dealer Merrill Lynch for failing to have a supervisory system in place that would properly monitor employee accounts. FINRA stated that Bruce Hammonds, who at the time was a registered representative of Merrill Lynch, was permitted to open a business account but failed to supervise funds that customers deposited and Hammonds withdrew. Mr. Hammonds ended up “convincing more than 11 individuals to invest more than $1 million in a Ponzi scheme” run through the business account, FINRA disclosed.

FINRA further reported that Merrill Lynch’s “inadequate supervisory system and the firm’s reliance on employee self-reporting enabled Hammonds to facilitate his Ponzi scheme, to the detriment of investors.” Merrill Lynch’s system, one that could only be effective if an employee did not properly set their social security number as the primary number associated with the account was found by FINRA to properly capture the account, which allowed Mr. Hammonds to perpetuate his scheme.

Firms’ failures to properly supervise their registered representatives is something Malecki Law takes very seriously, and we have launched investigations into several such alleged schemes, including one allegedly perpetrated by Carr Miller Capital, LLC and the Van Zandt Agency.

Malecki Law takes a proactive and informed approach to the financial news of today: actively engaging in fact-finding analysis on prospective cases from around the world. Our thorough knowledge of securities law’s history and fine points makes us ideal consultants for investors who have suffered losses due to misadvice from their broker or other financial counsel. Information on a selection of funds and companies currently under investigation by Malecki Law can be found below. Our pursuit of excellence is constant, but our opportunities to make lasting positive change to the securities industry begin and end with determined clients who seek justice.

Malecki Law is currently investigating preferred stock of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as sold by an array of investment firms throughout 2007 and 2008, including but not limited to UBS, CitiGroup, Morgan Stanley, and Merrill Lynch.

Preferred stock can be defined as a hybrid of equity and debt instruments: it is prioritized over common stock when paying dividends and/or after liquidation. Preferred stock has been considered an appealing financing tool: selling such stock allows companies to defer dividends without affecting their credit or defaulting.

Contact Information