DOCSLIB.ORG

November 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
November 2016 THE STATE CENTER October – November CONSUMER 2016 PROTECTION REPORT About the State Center Consumer Protection Report The National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School’s Consumer Protection Report is now the State Center Consumer Protection Report ("Consumer Protection Report"). Published by The Center for State Enforcement of Antitrust and Consumer Protection Laws (“State Center”) in partnership with StateAG.org, the Consumer Protection Report is a monthly compilation of state attorney general press releases on local and national consumer protection efforts, including investigations, court cases, consumer alerts and advocacy initiatives. It makes no effort to prioritize, analyze or comment on the information presented in the press releases and their potential impact on consumers. The Consumer Protection Report relies solely and exclusively on state attorney general press releases, and thus is not an exhaustive representation of state attorney general consumer protection activity. The Consumer Protection Report is produced through the State Center’s State AG Consumer Protection Initiative: a website featuring all current and previous editions of the Report and a database, allowing visitors to conduct key-word and drop-down menu searches of all previous editions. To visit the Initiative website, please visit www.statecenterinc.org/cpi-newsletter. • If an office would like their consumer protection activity included in subsequent newsletters, please contact us. • Newsletter sign up: To sign up for the monthly Consumer Protection Report, please sign up here. For more information about the State Center and StateAG.org, please visit our websites: State Center: http://www.statecenterinc.org StateAG.org: www.stateag.org Page 1 of 64 Table of Contents Consumer Protection Cases ........................................................................................................................ 4 ARIZONA ................................................................................................................................................. 4 CALIFORNIA............................................................................................................................................. 6 COLORADO.............................................................................................................................................. 6 FLORIDA .................................................................................................................................................. 8 IDAHO ................................................................................................................................................... 10 ILLINOIS ................................................................................................................................................. 11 INDIANA ................................................................................................................................................ 13 MARYLAND ........................................................................................................................................... 14 MASSACHUSETTS .................................................................................................................................. 14 MICHIGAN ............................................................................................................................................. 16 MISSISSIPPI ........................................................................................................................................... 18 MISSOURI .............................................................................................................................................. 19 NEBRASKA ............................................................................................................................................. 20 NEVADA ................................................................................................................................................ 20 NEW HAMPSHIRE .................................................................................................................................. 22 NEW JERSEY .......................................................................................................................................... 22 NEW YORK ............................................................................................................................................ 25 NORTH CAROLINA ................................................................................................................................. 30 NORTH DAKOTA .................................................................................................................................... 32 OHIO ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 OKLAHOMA ........................................................................................................................................... 34 PENNSYLVANIA ..................................................................................................................................... 35 TEXAS .................................................................................................................................................... 38 UTAH ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 VERMONT ............................................................................................................................................. 39 VIRGINIA ............................................................................................................................................... 41 WASHINGTON ....................................................................................................................................... 41 Multistate Cases ....................................................................................................................................... 43 MASSACHUSETTS .................................................................................................................................. 48 MISSOURI .............................................................................................................................................. 48 OKLAHOMA ........................................................................................................................................... 50 Page 2 of 64 RHODE ISLAND ...................................................................................................................................... 51 TEXAS .................................................................................................................................................... 51 VERMONT ............................................................................................................................................. 52 Consumer Protection Advocacy ................................................................................................................ 53 ARIZONA ............................................................................................................................................... 53 IOWA..................................................................................................................................................... 53 KANSAS ................................................................................................................................................. 55 KENTUCKY ............................................................................................................................................. 55 MISSISSIPPI ........................................................................................................................................... 56 MISSOURI .............................................................................................................................................. 56 MONTANA ............................................................................................................................................ 57 NEW HAMPSHIRE .................................................................................................................................. 57 NEW JERSEY .......................................................................................................................................... 58 NEW YORK ............................................................................................................................................ 59 NORTH CAROLINA ................................................................................................................................. 59 OHIO ..................................................................................................................................................... 60 SOUTH CAROLINA ................................................................................................................................. 61 TEXAS .................................................................................................................................................... 62 UTAH ....................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • S Unsolved Mysteries | 1
    Madoff’s Unsolved Mysteries | 1 Madoff’s Unsolved Mysteries By Edward Jay Epstein Mon, Oct 4, 2010 On September 26, Los Angeles moneyman Stanley Chais may have taken the secret of the Ponzi artist’s missing billions to his grave. The black hole into which Bernie Madoff pumped a still unaccounted-for $7.9 billion grew even darker on September 26 with the death of 84-year-old Los Angeles investment advisor Stanley Chais, one of only two potential witnesses to the laundering of these mystery funds. Both Chais and another Madoff associate, Jeffry Picower, had been charged in separate fraud suits by the SEC in 2009. The government hoped they would help expose the “labyrinth of interrelated international funds, institutions, and entities of almost unparalleled complexity and breadth” into which the money vanished, as a bankruptcy trustee described it. But neither case will ever come to trial. In two of the greatest disappearing acts in financial history, Chais died 10 days ago of a rare blood disease and Picower drowned in his own swimming pool in Florida last October, after an apparent heart attack at age 67. Each had known Madoff for 30 years or more, long before he began his Ponzi scheme. Both men had enjoyed special access to Madoff’s operation. According to the SEC complaint, Picower was told in advance of Madoff’s monthly profit “targets,” or the amounts with which Madoff planned to pad Picower’s accounts. With this knowledge, Picower or his assistant could request higher or lower “profits” for various accounts. Moreover, to amplify Picower’s fictional profits to accommodate this siphoning off, Madoff extended him so much fictional credit that his accounts had, according to the bankruptcy trustee’s analysis, a “negative net cash balance of approximately $6 billion at the time of Madoff’s arrest.” Picower collaborated by faxing Madoff backdated letters to support fabricated trades, some of which reportedly earned profits as high as 550%.
    [Show full text]
  • Hedge Funds: Due Diligence, Red Flags and Legal Liabilities
    Hedge Funds: Due Diligence, Red Flags and Legal Liabilities This Website is Sponsored by: Law Offices of LES GREENBERG 10732 Farragut Drive Culver City, California 90230-4105 Tele. & Fax. (310) 838-8105 [email protected] (http://www.LGEsquire.com) BUSINESS/INVESTMENT LITIGATION/ARBITRATION ==== The following excerpts of articles, arranged mostly in chronological order and derived from the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Reuters, Los Angles Times, Barron's, MarketWatch, Bloomberg, InvestmentNews and other sources, deal with due diligence in hedge fund investing. They describe "red flags." They discuss the hazards of trying to recover funds from failed investments. The sponsor of this website provides additional commentary. "[T]he penalties for financial ignorance have never been so stiff." --- The Ascent of Money (2008) by Niall Ferguson "Boom times are always accompanied by fraud. As the Victorian journalist Walter Bagehot put it: 'All people are most credulous when they are most happy; and when money has been made . there is a happy opportunity for ingenious mendacity.' ... Bagehot observed, loose business practices will always prevail during boom times. During such periods, the gatekeepers of the financial system -- whether bankers, professional investors, accountants, rating agencies or regulators -- should be extra vigilant. They are often just the opposite." (WSJ, 4/17/09, "A Fortune Up in Smoke") Our lengthy website contains an Index of Articles. However, similar topics, e.g., "Bayou," "Madoff," "accountant," may be scattered throughout several articles. To locate all such references, use your Adobe Reader/Acrobat "Search" tool (binocular symbol). Index of Articles: 1. "Hedge Funds Can Be Headache for Broker, As CIBC Case Shows" 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Branding in Ponzi Investment Schemes by Yaron Sher Thesis Bachelors of Honours in Strategic Brand Communication Vega School Of
    BRANDING IN PONZI INVESTMENT SCHEMES BY YARON SHER THESIS SUBMITTED IN THE FUFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE BACHELORS OF HONOURS IN STRATEGIC BRAND COMMUNICATION AT THE VEGA SCHOOL OF BRAND LEADERSHIP JOHANNESBURG SUPERVISOR: NICOLE MASON DATE: 23/10/2015 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I wish to express my thanks to Nicole Mason, my research supervisor, for providing me with all the necessary assistance in completing this research paper. I would also like to give thanks to Jenna Echakowitz and Alison Cordeiro for their assistance in the construction of my research activation and presentation. I take this opportunity to express gratitude to all faculty members at Vega School of Brand Leadership Johannesburg for their help and support. I would like thank my family especially my parents Dafna and Manfred Sher for their love and encouragement. I am also grateful to my girlfriend Cayli Smith who provided me with the necessary support throughout this particular period. I also like to place on record, my sense of gratitude to one and all, who directly or indirectly, have helped me in this producing this research study. Page 2 of 60 Abstract The subject field that involves illegal investment schemes such as the Ponzi scheme is an issue that creates a significant negative issues in today’s society. The issue results in forcing financial investors to question their relationship and trust with certain individuals who manage their investments. This issue also forces investors, as well as society, to question the ethics of people, especially those involved in investments who operate their brand within the financial sector.
    [Show full text]
  • The Madoff Investment Securities Fraud: Regulatory and Oversight Concerns and the Need for Reform Hearing Committee on Banking
    S. HRG. 111–38 THE MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURITIES FRAUD: REGULATORY AND OVERSIGHT CONCERNS AND THE NEED FOR REFORM HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON HOW THE SECURITIES REGULATORY SYSTEM FAILED TO DETECT THE MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURITIES FRAUD, THE EXTENT TO WHICH SECURITIES INSURANCE WILL ASSIST DEFRAUDED VICTIMS, AND THE NEED FOR REFORM JANUARY 27, 2009 Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs ( Available at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/senate05sh.html U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 50–465 PDF WASHINGTON : 2009 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Nov 24 2008 08:33 Jul 07, 2009 Jkt 048080 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 S:\DOCS\50465.TXT JASON COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut, Chairman TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama JACK REED, Rhode Island ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York JIM BUNNING, Kentucky EVAN BAYH, Indiana MIKE CRAPO, Idaho ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey MEL MARTINEZ, Florida DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii BOB CORKER, Tennessee SHERROD BROWN, Ohio JIM DEMINT, South Carolina JON TESTER, Montana DAVID VITTER, Louisiana HERB KOHL, Wisconsin MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska MARK R. WARNER, Virginia KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado COLIN MCGINNIS, Acting Staff Director WILLIAM D.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Chapter 1 As a PDF
    1 An Earthquake on Wall Street Monday, December 8, 2008 He is ready to stop now, ready to just let his vast fraud tumble down around him. Despite his confident posturing and his apparent imperviousness to the increasing market turmoil, his investors are deserting him. The Spanish banking executives who visited him on Thanksgiving Day still want to withdraw their money. So do the Italians running the Kingate funds in London, and the managers of the fund in Gibraltar and the Dutch-run fund in the Caymans, and even Sonja Kohn in Vienna, one of his biggest boosters. That’s more than $1.5 billion right there, from just a handful of feeder funds. Then there’s the continued hemorrhaging at Fairfield Greenwich Group—$980 million through November and now another $580 million for December. If he writes a check for the December redemptions, it will bounce. There’s no way he can borrow enough money to cover those with- drawals. Banks aren’t lending to anyone now, certainly not to a midlevel wholesale outfit like his. His brokerage firm may still seem impressive to his trusting investors, but to nervous bankers and harried regulators today, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities is definitely not “too big to fail.” Last week he called a defense lawyer, Ike Sorkin. There’s probably not much that even a formidable attorney like Sorkin can do for him at this point, but he’s going to need a lawyer. He made an appointment for 2 | The Wizard of Lies 11:30 am on Friday, December 12.
    [Show full text]
  • October 30, 2013 Tenth Interim Report
    08-01789-brl Doc 5554 Filed 10/30/13 Entered 10/30/13 16:52:26 Main Document Pg 1 of 107 Baker & Hostetler LLP 45 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10111 Telephone: (212) 589-4200 Facsimile: (212) 589-4201 Irving H. Picard Email: [email protected] David J. Sheehan Email: [email protected] Seanna R. Brown Email: [email protected] Heather R. Wlodek Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Irving H. Picard, Trustee for the Substantively Consolidated SIPA Liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC And Bernard L. Madoff UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION, Adv. Pro. No. 08-01789 (BRL) Plaintiff-Applicant, SIPA Liquidation v. (Substantively Consolidated) BERNARD L. MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURITIES LLC, Defendant. In re: BERNARD L. MADOFF, Debtor. TRUSTEE’S TENTH INTERIM REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 08-01789-brl Doc 5554 Filed 10/30/13 Entered 10/30/13 16:52:26 Main Document Pg 2 of 107 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 5 II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 7 III. FINANCIAL CONDITION OF THE ESTATE ................................................................ 7 IV. ADMINISTRATION OF THE ESTATE .......................................................................... 8 A. Marshaling And Liquidating The Estate Assets ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bernard Madoff A
    Brigham Young University Law School BYU Law Digital Commons Faculty Scholarship 12-31-2009 Evil Has a New Name (And a New Narrative): Bernard Madoff A. Christine Hurt BYU Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Banking and Finance Law Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation A. Christine Hurt, ???? ??? ? ??? ???? (??? ? ??? ?????????): ??????? ??????, 2009 Mɪᴄʜ. Sᴛ. L. Rᴇᴠ. 947. This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EVIL HAS A NEW NAME (AND A NEW NARRATIVE): BERNARD MADOFF Christine Hurt* 2009 MICH. ST. L. REV. 947 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................. ....... 947 I. MADOFF'S EXTRAORDINARY CRIME.........................951 A. The Rise and Fall of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities..951 B. Madoff's Scheme as Affinity Fraud ..................... 957 II. VICTIMS SHAPE THE MADOFF NARRATIVE ....................... 959 A. Victim Impact Statements ................... ......... 961 B. Sentencing "Extraordinary Evil " ............. ........... 965 C. Restitution, Remission, and Compensation ......... ...... 968 1. Restitution ....................................... 968 2. SIPC Compensation ............................ 969 3. Tax Relief ................ .................
    [Show full text]
  • Madoff Figure's $20M Deal with Calif., Investors OK'd
    Portfolio Media. Inc. | 111 West 19th Street, 5th floor | New York, NY 10011 | www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | [email protected] Madoff Figure's $20M Deal With Calif., Investors OK’d By Bonnie Eslinger Law360, Los Angeles (March 1, 2017, 10:32 PM EST) -- Calling the deal a “fair result,” a California judge gave final approval Wednesday to a $20.2 million settlement investors and the state reached with the estate of a now-deceased Beverly Hills adviser who allegedly funneled investor money into Bernie Madoff’s notorious Ponzi scheme. Lead plaintiff Bottlebrush Investments LP, a limited partnership formed for the purpose of capital investment, first filed suit against investment adviser Stanley Chais and the Lambeth Company, in which he was a partner, in February 2009. The complaint alleged that Chais represented that he managed investments in “arbitrage partnerships” and that Bottlebrush invested more than $36 million through Chais only to learn later that he had turned the funds over to Madoff. Not until Madoff’s massive fraud was revealed did the plaintiffs learn that was where their money was invested and that it was all gone. In 2009, three other related derivative actions were filed against Chais, among others, also seeking recovery of funds lost through Madoff. The California Attorney General’s Office also filed suit against Chais, who died in 2010. The $20.2 million settlement approved Wednesday by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Allen White incorporates a $15 million agreement reached by the state to secure restitution for California residents who invested money with Chais.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Year in Review: SEC and SRO Selected Enforcement Cases and Developments Regarding Broker-Dealers
    review 2009 Year in Review: SEC and SRO Selected Enforcement Cases and Developments Regarding Broker-Dealers www.morganlewis.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... 1 The SEC ................................................................................................... 2 Developments Relating to Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi Scheme..................... 4 Auction Rate Securities............................................................................. 4 FINRA....................................................................................................... 4 NYSE Regulation...................................................................................... 5 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ................................................................... 7 Enforcement Developments at the SEC in 2009 ................................................. 7 Changes in Personnel and Division of Enforcement Structure ................. 7 Enforcement Statistics .............................................................................. 9 Policy Developments .............................................................................. 11 Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force............................................... 13 Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission ....................................................... 13 Legislative Developments....................................................................... 14 Current
    [Show full text]
  • Bernard Madoff
    Brigham Young University Law School BYU Law Digital Commons Faculty Scholarship 12-31-2009 Evil Has a New Name (And a New Narrative): Bernard Madoff A. Christine Hurt BYU Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Banking and Finance Law Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation A. Christine Hurt, Evil Has a New Name (And a New Narrative): Bernard Madoff, ( ,): , 2009 Mɪᴄʜ. Sᴛ. L. Rᴇᴠ. 947. This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EVIL HAS A NEW NAME (AND A NEW NARRATIVE): BERNARD MADOFF Christine Hurt* 2009 MICH. ST. L. REV. 947 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................. ....... 947 I. MADOFF'S EXTRAORDINARY CRIME.........................951 A. The Rise and Fall of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities..951 B. Madoff's Scheme as Affinity Fraud ..................... 957 II. VICTIMS SHAPE THE MADOFF NARRATIVE ....................... 959 A. Victim Impact Statements ................... ......... 961 B. Sentencing "Extraordinary Evil " ............. ........... 965 C. Restitution, Remission, and Compensation ......... ...... 968 1. Restitution ....................................... 968 2. SIPC Compensation ............................ 969 3. Tax Relief ...............
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 129, Number 48
    MIT’s The Weather Oldest and Largest Today: Partly cloudy. High 55°F (13°C). Tonight: Increasing clouds. Low 48°F Newspaper (9°C). Tomorrow: Showers. High 53°F (12°C). http://tech.mit.edu/ Details, Page 2 Volume 129, Number 48 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Tuesday, October 27, 2009 Clean Energy Is Our Future, Says Obama Cambridge Council Candidate Knocks For Votes By Jessica J. Pourian STAFF REPORTER Have you seen Leland Cheung? As Election Day nears, the Cambridge City Council candidate and Sloan School student has been trying to talk to as many people as possible. He’s even made the rounds in some MIT dorms to ask for your vote. “I’ve been knocking on more doors than any other candidate,” he said. Cheung, who is an MBA candi- date at Sloan and an MPA candidate at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Gov- ernment, is one of 21 people vying for nine seats on the Cambridge City Council. Cheung said that college vot- ers are central to his campaign. Re- cently, he has been running registra- tion drives at Harvard and MIT asking Sam Range—THE TECH students to switch their registration so President Barack Obama speaks about his administration’s energy policy and MIT’s Energy Initiative at Kresge Auditorium on Friday. The President they vote in the local election. started his speech jovially mentioning that MIT hackers had placed his motorcade on Building 10. See pages 8–9 for more images of the event. “It’s really going to depend on the students who are registered to vote in By Ana Lyons to a crowd of about 750, including ergy.
    [Show full text]
  • First Interim Trustee Report.DOC
    Baker & Hostetler LLP 45 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10111 Telephone: (212) 589-4200 Facsimile: (212) 589-4201 Irving H. Picard Email: [email protected] David J. Sheehan Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Irving H. Picard, Esq. Trustee for the Substantively Consolidated SIPA Liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC And Bernard L. Madoff UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION Adv. Pro. No. 08-1789 (BRL) CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Applicant, SIPA Liquidation v. (Substantively Consolidated) BERNARD L. MADOFF INVESTMENT SECURITIES LLC, Defendant. In re: BERNARD L. MADOFF, Debtor. TRUSTEE’S FIRST INTERIM REPORT FOR THE PERIOD DECEMBER 11, 2008 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009 300016705 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................2 III. PROCEDURAL HISTORY .................................................................................5 IV. LIQUIDATION PROCEEDING..........................................................................5 V. ADMINISTRATION OF THE ESTATE..............................................................7 A. RETENTION OF PROFESSIONALS ............................................................7 B. MARSHALLING AND LIQUIDATION OF ESTATE ASSETS ...................8 C. WIND-DOWN OF ESTATE OPERATIONS...............................................15 VI. FINANCIAL
    [Show full text]