According to the state of Massachusetts, Securities America sold investors roughly $697 million worth of Medical Capital notes issued by Medical Capital Holdings, Inc. (Medical Capital). Securities America offered the notes to investors in a number of private placements, meaning the securities were considered too risky to be solicited or sold to the general public. The complaint alleges that Securities America did not properly disclose the material risks associated with the notes prior to selling them to investors.

In a statement concerning the issue, Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth, William Galvin, said:

“Our investigation showed that Securities America ignored their own due diligence analysts and sold these notes to unsophisticated investors without telling them the risks involved. People invested their life savings, while this dealer hid from them the truth of what they were getting into.”

In addition to allegedly misleading investors by Securities America, since August of 2008, Medical Capital has been in permanent receivership and has defaulted on every one of its outstanding note obligations. This means that approximately $1.079 billion of notes are in default, leaving millions of investors’ dollars – including the life savings of many – frozen. The civil complaint also seeks restitution for investors whose dollars are now illiquid.

From approximately 2003 to 2009, Medical Capital issued over $1.7 billion in Medical Capital notes. Acting as a placement agent between the notes and investors, Securities America handled the sale of roughly 37 percent of the total notes issued, or $697 million.
In connection with the sale of the notes in Massachusetts alone, Securities America received nearly $30 million in compensation. This does not include the untold millions of dollars worth of compensation received from countless more allegedly mislead investors in other states.

Although Massachusetts filed this complaint on behalf of investors within its state lines, this case of financial fraud affects investors throughout the United States. If you invested in Medical Capital notes using Securities America, please contact an attorney experienced in securities fraud immediately to discuss protecting your rights under the law.

Click on the following link to read the official complaint filed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Click on the following link to read the Boston Herald’s article, State seeks restitution for securities of America investors.

Along with Sandra Hatfield, DHB’s former chief operating officer, Mr. Brooks is accused of securities fraud, insider trading, manipulating financial records, and a bevy of additional charges. Brooks and Hatfield reportedly used deceitful techniques to increase the company’s reported earnings and profits substantially.

According to federal prosecutors, Brooks and Hatfield reportedly inflated the value of DHB’s stock by lying about the inventory of supposedly shipped combat vests to the U.S. military. As a result, the duo defrauded the company for a combined $190,000 million, reportedly $185 million for Brooks, and $5 million for Hatfield. Both have pleaded not guilty to the charges
.
“This is a case about the naked greed of two people, Sandra Hatfield and David Brooks, and the lies and the fraud that they used to satisfy that greed,” Richard Lunger, Assistant U.S. Attorney told jurors in his opening statement. “In the end they lied in order to push up the price of the company’s stock, then [they] sold their stock for $190 million.”

In July 2006, shares of DHB stock were removed from American Stock Exchange listings. Although still headquartered in Pompano Beach, Florida, DHB has since been renamed Point Blank Solutions, Inc. According to the company’s Web site, Point Blank is an industry leader in ballistic technologies, including its Point Blank Body Armor and other protective apparel, for the military and other authorities.

For more information about the case, click on the following Bloomberg Business Week article on the DHB Fraud of Ex-CEO

To learn more about this and other financial fraud cases, visit the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Web site www.SEC.GOV

The case is U.S. v. David Brooks, 06-CR-550, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Central Islip).

Please enjoy a few important highlights from the Securities and Exchange Commission:

The SEC has approved stronger safeguards to Protect Clients’ Assets Controlled by Investment Advisers
The new rules provide safeguards where there is a heightened potential for fraud or theft of client assets. The SEC’s new amended custody rule promotes independent custody and requires the use of independent public accountants as third-party monitors.

According to SEC Chairman Mary L. Schapiro, “The Madoff Ponzi scheme and other frauds have caused investors to question whether their assets are safe when they entrust them to an investment adviser. These new rules will apply additional safeguards where the safeguards are needed most — that is, where the risk of fraud is heightened by the degree of control the adviser has over the client’s assets.”

SEC Charges Houston-Based Broker With Defrauding Florida Municipalities
The Securities and Exchange Commission charged a Houston-based broker with engaging in unauthorized and unsuitable trading on behalf of two Florida municipalities, putting them at risk of losing millions of dollars while he personally made over 14 million in commissions.

$418 Million Fair Fund Distribution to Harmed Investors in Invesco Mutual Funds

The Fair Fund distribution stems from a prior SEC enforcement action against IFG. This distribution also includes money from two other Fair Funds related to separate unlawful marketing timing enforcement actions that affected Invesco investors.

Investment Adviser charged by SEC in Fraudulent Scheme Utilizing Football Stars
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed securities fraud charges against Kurt B. Barton and Triton Financial LLC,
for operating a multi-million dollar scam that used former professional football players to promote its offerings

The purpose of the OIG’s report was to determine the SEC enforcement department’s shortcomings and to identify those areas in which the department needs to make improvements to better fight securites fraud. The goal of the report was to bolster SEC enforcement measures in an effort to prevent another securities fraud case with such far-reaching implications and consequences as the Madoff case. It is the SEC’s job to protect investors from securities fraud. When the department fails to properly carry out its job duties the ramifications can spell disaster for investors.

The following systemic problems within the SEC’s enforcement department were identified in the OIG’s report: staff’s failure to thoroughly review complaints; due diligence was not exercised regarding complaints; inexperienced staff conducted unsupervised investigations; complaints were not sufficiently reviewed; staff failed to seek assistance from other departments and divisions; staff did not verify information with independent third-party representatives; administrative tasks were not completed in a timely manner. According to the OIG report, additional areas in which staff felt changes needed to be made and information clarified included: case handling procedure, program priorities, and working relationships.

The report issued by the OIG offered 21 recommendations to the department in order to create a more effective program. These recommendations focused on management control, establishment of formal guidelines, and a review of existing policy and procedures. The Director of Enforcement at the SEC stated that these measures would be implemented.

To read more on the this of OIG Recommendations view the following: Office of Inspector General (OIG) Audit on SEC - Program Improvements Needed within the SEC's Enforcement Division, Housingwire.com