Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of February 01 to February 07

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Grove Automotive Limited
Violation: GAL is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that GAL is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether GAL managed its business in such a way as to ensure that its affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: North Wales Sanitary Cladding Ltd.
Violation: NWSCL is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that NWSCL is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether NWSCL managed its business in such a way as to ensure that its affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: CGS Auto Centre Ltd.
Violation: CACL is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that CACL is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether CACL managed its business in such a way as to ensure that its affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: MKJ Car Sales Limited
Violation: MCSL is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that MCSL is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether MCSL managed its business in such a way as to ensure that its affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: MH Auto House Limited
Violation: MAHL is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that MAHL is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether MAHL managed its business in such a way as to ensure that its affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Harts Car Company Ltd.
Violation: HCCL is failing to satisfy the suitability Threshold Condition, in that the Authority is not satisfied that HCCL is a fit and proper person having regard to all the circumstances, including whether HCCL managed its business in such a way as to ensure that its affairs were conducted in a sound and prudent manner… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: FS Claims Ltd.
Violation: FS Claims failed to respond to four separate requests for the provision of information considered by the Authority to be necessary to enable the Authority to determine the Application. These requests were made over a six-week period, and three of the requests included a statement that FS Claims must contact the Authority or the Authority would recommend to the Authority’s Regulatory Transactions Committee (“RTC”) that FS Claims be given a Warning Notice… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Daniel J. Arcuri, Jr.
Violation: For twice failing to appear and provide on-the-record testimony during an investigation as required by FINRA Rule 8210, Respondent is barred from associating with any FINRA member in any capacity… Read More

Penalties: $5,000.00
Respondent: FIMCO Securities Group, Inc.
Violation: From 2010 through 2018 (the “Relevant Period”), FIMCO failed to test the Firm’s supervisory controls, policies and procedures and to document the results in an annual report, in violation of NASD Rule 3012 (for conduct prior to December 1, 2014), FINRA Rule 3120 (for conduct on or after December 1, 2014) and FINRA Rule 2010. FIMCO also failed to prepare eight annual certifications of its compliance and supervisory processes, in violation of FINRA Rules 3130 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Robert Juan Escobio
Violation: Robert Juan Escobio failed to comply with multiple Rule 8210 requests for documents and information and on-the-record testimony. For this misconduct, Escobio is barred from association with any FINRA member in any capacity… Read More

Penalties: $90,000.00
Respondent: BNP Paribas Securities Corp.
Violation: In the period September 22-23, 2015 (the “2015 exam period”), the firm submitted inaccurate, incomplete, or improperly formatted information to OATS, in violation of FINRA Rules 7450 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: $5,000.00
Respondent: John Martin Harman
Violation: While associated with Royal Alliance, Harman directed two customers to sign blank or incomplete distribution request forms, which Harman thereafter completed and submitted for processing. In so doing, Harman violated FINRA Rule 2010… Read More

Penalties: $7,500.00
Respondent: Peter D. Monson
Violation: Between June 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016, Monson engaged in excessive and unsuitable trading in the Individual Retirement Account (“IRA”) of his customer, GC. Monson actively traded risky, microcap stocks in GC’s account throughout that period, even though GC’s account value had declined by more than 60% since its inception and GC was facing a serious illness. Through this conduct, Monson violated FINRA Rules 2111 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: $250,000.00
Respondent: Virtu Americas LLC (f/k/a KCG Americas LLC)
Violation: During the period of January 1, 2017 through September 30, 2017, the firm failed to timely report 235 transactions in Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (“TRACE”)- Eligible Securities in violation of FINRA Rules 6730(a) and 2010. The firm also failed to accurately report the correct time of execution in 231 transactions in TRACE-Eligible Securities in violation of FINRA Rule 6730(c)(8). Further, the firm failed to supervise transactions in TRACE-Eligible Securities to achieve compliance with the firm’s reporting obligations under FINRA Rule 6730… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Ana Lucia Chavarriaga
Violation: Chavarriaga was responsible for conducting a supervisory review of the firm’s fixed income trade reporting, among other responsibilities. In connection with two such reviews, Chavarriaga backdated documents and drafted false written statements that the firm provided to FINRA in response to FINRA’s requests for information made pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210 (“Rule 8210”)… Read More

Penalties: $660,000.00
Respondent: Quantum Wellness Botanical Institute, LCC.
Violation: In January 2020, the sellers of a pill called ReJuvenation settled FTC charges that they deceptively claimed that their product is a virtual cure-all for age-related ailments—including cell damage, heart attack damage, brain damage, blindness, and deafness. The orders settling the FTC’s complaint prohibit the defendants from making such claims unless they are true and supported by scientific evidence… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: On Point Global LLC
Violation: The defendants operated hundreds of websites that promised a quick and easy government service, such as renewing a driver’s license, or eligibility determinations for public benefits… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: LendEDU.com
Violation: The operators of LendEDU.com falsely claimed that the website provided “objective,” “accurate,” and “unbiased” information about consumer financial products, such as student loans, personal loans, and credit cards. Specifically, LendEDU misrepresented that the information on its website was not affected by compensation from advertisers… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Edward E. Matthes
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) against Edward E. Matthes (“Respondent” or “Matthes”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Jason David St. Amour
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Jason David St. Amour (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Cannell Capital LLC.
Violation: CCL willfully violated Section 204A of the Advisers Act, which requires registered investment advisers to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed, taking into consideration the nature of the adviser’s business, to prevent the misuse by the investment adviser and its associated persons of material, nonpublic information… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Gregory Lamont Drake
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Gregory Lamont Drake (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: $50,000.00
Respondent: Gordon Caplan, Esq.
Violation: On May 21, 2019, Caplan pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud in connection with the 2019 nationwide college admissions scandal… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Charlie Jinan Chen and Shui Foon Mok
Violation: “The evidence at trial also showed that, upon being questioned by the FBI in 2016, Chen claimed that he did not know anyone who worked at Vistaprint and falsely denied having a close relationship with the Vistaprint insider and her husband with whom he and his family had vacationed. The jury found Chen liable on all counts, finding that he violated the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933. The SEC is seeking disgorgement of Chen’s insider trading profits and may seek civil penalties of up to three times the amount of Chen’s ill-gotten gains.
“… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: LBB & Associates Ltd., LLP and Carlos Lopez, CPA
Violation: “Respondents’ failures in the 2012 BRS audit to abide by the applicable professional standards concerning the identification of related party transactions and audit of known related party transactions (articulated in AU §334 and AU § 9334) constitute multiple instances of highly unreasonable conduct in circumstances that warranted heightened scrutiny. Those violations, Respondents’ other failures during the 2012 audit to conform to applicable professional standards (articulated in AU § 230, AU § 329, AS § 7, AS § 13, and AS § 15), and their failures in connection with the EQRs for the 2013 and 2014 BRS audits (articulated in AS § 7) also constitute repeated instances of unreasonable conduct.”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: ABN Amro Clearing Chicago LLC.
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), against ABN AMRO Clearing Chicago LLC (“ABN AMRO CC” or “Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Jay Costa Kelter
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) against Jay Costa Kelter (“Kelter” or “Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: David Alan Wolfson
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against David Alan Wolfson(“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Glenn Joseph Story
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Glenn Joseph Story (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: $800,000.00
Respondent: “Leonardo Cornide and Jorge Falcon”
Violation: Respondents’ failure to disclose conflicts of interest while acting as investment advisers to Premier Assurance Group, SPC Ltd. (“PSPC”), a Cayman Islands-registered insurance company. In the Amended Order, the Commission ordered Respondents to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 206(2) of the investment Advisers Act of 1940. The Commission ordered Respondents to obtain the services of an independent compliance consultant to review and recommend certain policies and procedures relating to conflicts of interest… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Joseph A. Meyer, Jr.
Violation: “The Commission’s complaint alleged that, from at least 2009 until 2018, in connection with the sale of limited partnership interests in Arjun, Meyer falsely stated to investors that their funds were guaranteed against losses, misappropriated fund assets, sent out false account statements indicating that investors funds were fully invested and earning positive returns without disclosing that such returns were backed in significant part by unsecured promissory notes issued by Statim, and otherwise engaged in a variety of conduct that operated as a fraud and deceit on Arjun investors. “… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Thomas Troy Brooks
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Thomas Troy Brooks (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Wayne Scott Simpson
Violation: “From approximately 2012 through 2017, Respondent acted as an unregistered broker dealer who, for compensation in the form of undisclosed commissions taken directly from investor proceeds, engaged in the business of soliciting and advising others as to the advisability of investing in or purchasing securities of N1 Technologies, Inc. (“N1”). Respondent participated in an offering of N1 stock, which is a penny stock. Respondent, 49 years old, is a resident of Pompano Beach, Florida and has never been registered with or associated with an entity registered with the Commission”… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Randall Goulding, Esq.
Violation: “On November 12, 2019, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entered final judgment against Goulding after finding that he engaged in the abovedescribed conduct and thereby violated Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder. The court did not find that Goulding’s violations were not willful. The court also permanently enjoined Goulding from future violations, direct or indirect, of
Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder.”… Read More

Click here to see the full list of SEC Enforcement Documents