UBS Category Archives — Page 3 of 3 — Investor Lawyers Blog Published by New York, New York Investor Attorneys

Published on: January 24, 2013

UBS Willow Fund Declines 80%, Investors Could Recover Losses

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses in the UBS Willow Fund, sold by UBS Financial Services. Formed in 2000, the UBS Willow Fund is a private hedge fund. Reportedly, investors were notified in October 2012 that the Willow Fund had sustained substantial losses and would be liquidated.

Allegedly, UBS may have offered and sold the UBS Willow fund to investors — particularly customers with low risk tolerance seeking stable income, such as retirees — while marketing it as a safe, reliable investment. However, the fund has suffered a decline of around 80 percent. Investigations are also underway to determine if UBS Financial Services adequately disclosed or misrepresented the material risks of this investment to clients.

In some cases, securities fraud attorneys say that investors’ portfolios may have been over-concentrated in the UBS Willow Fund. If so, these portfolios may have been mismanaged, given that risk management strategies were available that would have offered investors protection for the value of their portfolio.

Published on: September 14, 2012

Cole Credit Property Trust II May be Following in the Footsteps of Other Non-traded REITs

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who were improperly sold various non-traded REIT investments and suffered significant losses as a result. Reportedly, Cole Credit Property Trust II is currently in the process of executing its “exit event.” In this event, a non-traded Real Estate Investment Trust either performs an initial public offering or sells its assets.

Cole Credit Property Trust II May be Following in the Footsteps of other Non-Traded REITs

In recent events, other non-traded REITs have gone through this process and securities fraud attorneys say that, in most cases, the event does not go well for investors. As a result of the exit event, many REITs have experienced a significant decline in the offering — often amounting to 30 percent or more of the investment’s value.

As the seventh-largest non-traded REIT in the industry, Cole Credit Property Trust II has invested assets amounting to nearly $3.4 billion. Reportedly, Morgan Stanley and UBS Investment Bank have been hired by Cole Credit Property Trust II to explore their options for the exit event. Investment fraud lawyers encourage Cole Credit Property Trust II investors to closely monitor the REIT’s valuation as, despite an estimated valuation of $9.35 per share, the trend in previous non-traded REITs indicates that the market may not be so kind to the per share valuation.

Published on: May 16, 2012

Investors Could Recover Losses from Inverse ETF, ETN Investments

by InvestorLawyers

ETFs (exchange traded funds) and ETNs (exchange traded notes) have recently gained a significant amount of attention in the securities industry. Securities fraud attorneys have been filing arbitration claims on behalf of investors who were unsuitably recommended ETFs or ETNs and suffered significant losses as a result. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has started to increase its efforts in regulating inverse ETFs and ETNs, hoping to ensure that unsophisticated investors are not being sold these complicated products.

Investors Could Recover Losses from their Inverse ETF and ETN Investments

In connection with FINRA’s efforts, UBS Financial Services, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Citigroup Global Markets Inc. have agreed to pay $7.3 million in fines and $1.8 million in restitution, totaling $9.1 million. This will settle allegations that they sold inverse and leveraged ETFs to clients for which the investment was unsuitable. According to FINRA, these four firms did not have a “reasonable basis” for the recommendation of the securities to certain clients and also failed to provide adequate supervision. For more than a year, from January 2008 through June 2009, $27 billion in inverse ETFs were bought and sold by the firms.

With ETFs and ETNs now being recognized as a significant problem, we are likely to see more sanctions leveled by FINRA. According to stock fraud lawyers, the SEC ceased approving applications for ETFs in March 2010, when those ETFs used derivatives. Furthermore, the SEC indicated that it wanted to determine if leveraged and inverse ETFs warranted additional investor protection. There is concern, from both FINRA and the SEC, that inverse and leveraged ETFs are being confused with traditional, less risky ETFs.

Published on: February 17, 2012

Securities Arbitration May Be Better Path for UBS Lehman Brothers Investors

by InvestorLawyers

Investment attorneys continue to seek investors who suffered significant losses in Lehman Brothers 100 Percent Principal Protection Notes and who wish to pursue securities arbitration claims in order to recover losses. Lehman Brothers 100 Percent Principal Protection Notes, also known as Principal Protected Notes, were issued by UBS Financial Services and have resulted in significant losses for many investors.

Securities Arbitration May be a Better Path for UBS Lehman Brothers 100% Principal Protected Notes Investors

Many claims have been filed on behalf of Lehman note holders in the Lehman bankruptcy proceedings, but there are many more investors who must take action if they wish to recover these losses. Though many investors hope to recover losses through the class action that has been filed, individual securities arbitration claims may prove to return a larger percentage of losses to investors. Based on the Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Lehman Brothers, it appears that investors will only receive about 21 cents on the dollar through the class action lawsuit. Therefore, investors should attempt to recover losses by any means available to them, including securities arbitration. Furthermore, investors should act immediately due to potential statutes of limitations.

Customers of UBS Financial Services who suffered losses as a result of their investments in Lehman Brothers 100 Percent Principal Protection Notes are encouraged to contact a stock fraud lawyer immediately for more information about filing a securities arbitration claim with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s Office of Dispute Resolution. One way to do this is to look for an attorney who is experienced at representing clients with these kinds of claims. You will want someone who knows the history of rulings relative to these claims, as well as someone who understands how to recover as much money as possible for his or her clients.

Published on: December 28, 2011

BNY Mellon Investors Seeking Investment Attorneys for Securities Arbitration Claims

by InvestorLawyers

On December 14, 2011, a class action lawsuit was filed against Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, also known as BNY Mellon, in the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit was filed for the class period of February 28, 2008, to August 11, 2011. Investment attorneys are encouraging individuals who acquired BNY Mellon stock through personal investment, inheritance or employment to explore possible securities arbitration claims as a means of recovering losses.

BNY Mellon Investors Seeking Investment Attorneys for Securities Arbitration Claims

Underwriters named in the lawsuit include BNY Mellon Capital, Barclays, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, UBS and Morgan Stanley. Under Section 11 and Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, underwriters of public offerings may be held liable if they fail to conduct a due diligence investigation of the information provided in prospectuses and registration statements.

The class action lawsuit states that, “The Underwriter Defendants underwrote BNY Mellon’s May 11, 2009 and/or June 3, 2010 common stock offering which were conducted pursuant to materially false and misleading offering materials and are charged with violations of the Securities Act in their capacity as underwriters for such offering.” Furthermore, allegations of the class action state that “throughout the Class Period, defendants concealed and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s financial well-being, business relationships, and prospects,” and goes on to claim that as a result of the wrongful acts and omissions of the defendants, combined with the “precipitous decline” of the common stocks’ market value that resulted from the disclosure of a FX trading scheme, investors suffered damages.

Published on: October 28, 2011

FINRA Decision: UBS Securities Fined $12 Million

by InvestorLawyers

On October 21, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced its decision to fine UBS Securities $12 million in securities arbitration. The fine is for charges of Regulation SHO violation and failure to supervise. UBS Securities did not properly supervise short sales and the result was millions of mismarked short sale orders, some of which were “placed to the market without reasonable grounds to believe that the securities could be borrowed and delivered,” according to the FINRA press release.

FINRA Decision: UBS Securities Fined $12 Million

Short sales occur when a security is sold by a seller that does not own it. When delivery is due, it is either purchased or borrowed by the short seller so that the delivery can be made. Regulation SHO requires that there are reasonable grounds for the broker-dealer to believe it could be borrowed and available for delivery. Regulation SHO reduces potential failures to deliver and states that broker-dealers must mark the trades as long or short. FINRA’s findings indicated that the supervisory system used by UBS was significantly flawed. Furthermore the flaws “resulted in a systemic supervisory failure that contributed to serious Reg SEO failures across its equities trading business,” according to FINRA documents.

FINRA’s investigation found that UBS Securities mismarked millions of sale trading orders, placed millions of short sale orders without locates and had significant aggregation unit deficiencies. Because of UBS’ supervisory failures, it wasn’t until after FINRA’s investigation and the resulting review of its systems and monitoring that many of its violations were corrected. According to FINRA, it wasn’t until at least 2009 that UBS’ supervisory framework was able to achieve compliance with certain securities laws, rules and regulations.

Published on: October 20, 2011

Advisers Make over $1.4 Billion from Bankrupt Lehman Brothers; Investors Get Back Twenty Cents on the Dollar

by InvestorLawyers

Once again, Wall Street insiders win and retail investors lose.

The outside advisers handling Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy – mostly bankers and lawyers – have made over $1.4 billion for their services since Lehman Brothers went bankrupt three years ago. If you’re a Wall Street insider, Lehman Brothers, which is bankrupt and out-of-business, is a fantastic place to work.

Meanwhile, investors holding Lehman Brothers structured notes are slated to get back only about one fifth of the money they invested in the notes when the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy litigation finally winds up. Financial advisers at UBS and other brokerage firms peddled Lehman Brothers structured notes with great-sounding names like “100% principal protected” notes and “Return Optimization” notes. But for investors getting back only twenty cents on the dollar, their principal wasn’t protected and their returns weren’t optimized.

Published on: October 20, 2011

Lehman Brothers, UBS and Wall Street Greed

by InvestorLawyers

Both Lehman Brothers and UBS have had more than their fair share of bad press over the last three years, but are they cut from the same cloth? A recent article in Forbes makes the argument that they are. September marked the three-year anniversary of Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy and the arrest of a UBS trader in London for fraud. When the world financial markets were shattered by the collapse of Lehman in 2008, many investors were left with annihilated life savings and retirement accounts.

Lehman Brothers, UBS and Wall Street Greed

Though it may appear that the most recent UBS incident and Lehman Brothers’ collapse are different events, according to Forbes’ article, “The players may be different but the rules are the same.” The “Delta One” trading desk used by the UBS trader and ETFs he was trading have a similar concept to the Lehman Brothers Principled Protected Notes sold by Lehman and UBS and both were excessively risky. Furthermore, UBS and Lehman worked cooperatively to dump the PPNs on investors, causing them significant losses.

Since the fiasco began, claimants been victorious in almost all securities arbitration cases against UBS and recovered their losses that resulted from the Lehman Structured Product Notes. However, criminal charges have not been brought against any Lehman executives, a measure of justice that is yet to be realized. According to an article in The New York Times, this is a case in which “brokers selling complex securities that they once contended were safe and sound have saddled individual investors with billions in losses since the credit bubble burst. Remember auction-rate securities? Those were peddled to investors as just as good as cash — until they no longer were after that market seized up in 2008.”

Published on: July 27, 2011

EX-UBS EMPLOYEE KOBAYASHI CHARGED BY THE SEC

by InvestorLawyers

Steven T. Kobayashi, a former financial adviser for UBS, was charged by the SEC on March 3, 2011. He was charged with misappropriating investors’ funds totaling $3.3 million.

Ex-UBS Employee Kobayashi Charged by the SEC

Allegedly, Kobayashi established a pooled life insurance policy investment fund, Life Settlement Partners LLC, and then solicited funds from many of his UBS customers. The problem, however, arose when he began using the funds as his own personal financing for gambling debts, expensive cars and prostitutes. Starting in 2006, Kobayashi spent at least $1.4 million on these personal and frivolous expenditures.

In an effort to cover his tracks, Kobayashi then defrauded more of his UBS customers, asking them to liquidate securities and transfer the money to more of his accounts in the fall of 2008. This second theft, which amounted to $1.9 million, was committed in an effort to repay Life Settlement Partners LLC before his initial theft was discovered. Kobayashi’s wrongdoings came to light when he could not pay the life settlement policy premiums on LSP and later when clients demanded their investment returns. A complaint was issued to UBS in September 2009 in which a customer accused Kobayashi of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from multiple accounts, including her own. The customer’s complaint went on to claim that he had forged documents and lied directly to investors about his intentions for their money. Kobayashi has not worked for UBS since the morning after the complaint was filed, when he tendered his resignation.