In August 2007, during an examination by NFA, NFA noted that FXLQ's June 30,2007, 1-FR-FCM listed as current assets securities with a market value of $35 million. FXLQ represented that this amount was solely attributable to a bond issued by ABN-AMRO. FXLQ further represented that this bond was being held at Malory Investments, a registered broker-dealer.
FXLQ has represented to NFA that it obtained the ABN-AMRO bond from its president and principal, Robert Gray, who in turn obtained it from a company called Swiss Imperial Trust A.G. in exchange for contractual services.
On November 28, 2007, NFA received documents from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Finra) (formerly NASD) evidencing that the ABN-AMRO bond and cash, which FXLQ represented were being held at Malory, were actually being held in Switzerland by Swiss Imperial in an account in the name of Malory. NFA has obtained information indicating that the owner of Swiss Imperial is also a part owner and principal of Malory.
As it appeared that the ABN-AMRO bond had never left the possession of Swiss Imperial, and that the information provided by FXLQ regarding where the bond and other firm assets were being held were not accurate, NFA informed FXLQ that it did not exercise sufficient control over the bond and the cash held by Swiss Imperial to qualify them as current assets. Accordingly, on November 29, 2007, NFA directed FXLQ to cause all firm assets being held at Swiss Imperial to be transferred to a regulated United States financial institution by 5:00p.m. on Friday, November 30th, and provide evidence of such transfer.
The same day that NFA directed FXLQ to execute the transfer described above, FXLQ represented that it was unaware that the ABN-AMRO bond and firm cash were being held at Swiss Imperial, FXLQ, however, represented that it had been working on transferring the ABN-AMRO bond and firm cash to a United States bank for approximately a week. When NFA asked for the name of the bank to which the assets were being transferred, Gray was unable to recall the full name of the bank, but indicated it included the word "Commonwealth" in its name.
On December 1, 2007, FXLQ sent e-mails to NFA in which it represented that the transfer had been effected from Swiss Imperial to "Commonwealth." FXLQ represented that the transfer only included cash, thereby suggesting that the ABN-AMRO bond had been liquidated.
On December 3rd, FXLQ represented to NFA that the transfer had been made to Commonwealth Financial Network, a registered broker-dealer, and provided NFA with an account number and CFN's web site address.
On December 4, 2007, NFA spoke with CFN and the firm represented that it did not have an account for FXLQ and that the account number that FXLQ provided to NFA was fictitious.
On December 4, 2007, FXLQ's General Counsel forwarded to NFA a letter from a firm identifying itself as "Commonwealth Financial P.M.S", which indicated that FXLQ c/o Robert Gray has funds in the amount of $47,800,000 on deposit in an account at Commonwealth Financial P.M.S. This letter contained CFN's website address. NFA subsequently spoke with CFN's chief compliance officer who indicated that Commonwealth Financial P.M.S. is not in any way affiliated with CFN. NFA staff then informed FXLQ's General Counsel that CFN has represented to NFA that it does not have an account for FXLQ, the account number provided to NFA was fictitious, and Commonwealth Financial P.M.S. is not in any way affiliated with CFN.
The Commonwealth Financial P.M.S. letter was purportedly signed by an individual named Tom Smith. NFA spoke with Tom Smith on December 4, 2007, who confirmed the contents of the letter and stated that Commonwealth Financial P.M.S. was a registered broker-dealer and provided NFA with the firm's purported CRD number. NFA then contacted FINRA and learned that the CRD number provided by Tom Smith was that of a former broker dealer that has not been registered since 1991. FINRA also confirmed that Commonwealth Financial P.M.S. is not currently a registered broker.
On December 3rd, FXLQ also provided NFA with net capital computations that purported to show that, as of November 30, 2007, FXLQ is in capital compliance. One computation purported to show the assets that FXLQ claims are at "Commonwealth." A second computation purported to show that even if the assets that FXLQ claims are at "Commonwealth" are non-current assets the firm would be in capital compliance.
FXLQ's October 31, 2007, Form 1-FR-FCM included a liability of accounts payable and accrued expenses of approximately $10 million, which was not included, however, in either of FXLQ's November 30th net capital calculations. On December 3, 2007, NFA requested that FXLQ provide evidence that the accounts payable and accrued expenses listed on its October 31, 2007, 1-FR-FCM had been paid.
Both of FXLQ's November 30th calculations also indicated that over $11.2 million of FXLQ's assets are being held at Malory. FINRA has advised NFA, however, that is has been unable to confirm that Malory's bank accounts have anything approaching this amount.
On December 4, 2007, NFA directed FXLQ to transfer funds that it claims are at Malory to the firm's bank account at US Bank. Further, NFA again directed FXLQ to provide evidence that the accounts payable and accrued expenses listed on its October 31, 2007. NFA gave FXLQ until 3:00pm to comply with these directives and FXLQ failed to comply.
COMPLAINT:
On May 18, 2007, NFA issued a Complaint charging Hamilton with use of deficient promotional material by non-Member solicitors. The Complaint also charged Hamilton with failing to maintain adequate books and records necessary and appropriate to conduct its business. Finally, the Complaint charged Hamilton with failing to take applicable concentration charges; failing to maintain adequate adjusted net capital; and failing to collect the required minimum security deposit.
ANSWER:
On July 5, 2007, Hamilton filed an Answer to the Complaint in which it denied the material allegations contained therein.
DECISION:
On December 5, 2007, Hamilton was ordered to pay a $90,000 fine. Hamilton was also ordered to cease to accept accounts or receive compensation, directly or indirectly, for forex transactions that are introduced by any person unless that person: (1) is an NFA Member, Associate of NFA, or pending approval as an NFA Member or Associate and is not subject to a Notice of Intent to Deny or Revoke registration; (2) is a member or associated with a member, of a national securities association registered under Section 15A(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and is operating pursuant to such membership or association; or (3) would be exempt from CFTC registration if such person were acting in the same capacity in connection with exchange-traded futures products.
The website claimed that Tradeco's trading platform permitted customers to trade "from real time streaming quotes" with "greater ease in executing trades" on a platform that "has a proven track record of reliability and stability."
Tradeco, however, had not had a trading platform on which customers could trade since at least July 2006.
Tradeco's website further claimed that its platform provided "trading technology [that] is the result of over 5 years of development and today supports billion in monthly trade volume." The website also declared that "clients and partners from over 110 countries currently rely on our proven technology, execution, clearing services and administrative tools."
In addition to not having a trading platform, Tradeco only had approximately twenty customers from five different countries, none of which had actually traded through Tradeco.
Through its website, Tradeco also claimed to be insured with "a fidelity 14 bond, which protects against loss resulting from fraudulent acts committed by an employee acting alone or in collusion with others."
When NFA inquired about the fidelity 14 bond, Tradeco was unable to provide any evidence that it had such a bond.
Finex Group GmbH is currently under audit of the Swiss Federal Banking Commission. The reason for this audit is to determine if Finex Group GmbH is required to have a bank license to offer forex trading in Switzerland . So at this time, please do NOT send any funds until we get the results of the SFBC. Regarding withdraws requests, we are told by the lawyers appointed by the SFBC that we canât process them until conclusion of this audit and we donât have a timeframe when this will happen as of today. We are in process of setting up another Finex Group company in another country that will take over the Finexâ FX business in Switzerland incase their final decision is that Finex Group is required to have a bank license to operate forex in Switzerland which at this time seems to be what that conclusion will be. There is no reason to be alarmed and we will either continue in Switzerland or move to another country.
There are certainly strange things happening with this whole
situation. I have a 6 figure account with FXLQ and have been with them for about a year and a half, very happy with them until now, by the way. On Tuesday evening I started my "work day" during the Asian market and tried to put a pending order, to my surprise it would not take it, so after repeated attempts I called the trading desk and they gave me the news on the whole situation. As it was explained by them, it seemed like something that would be resolved in a day or two.
Nevertheless, I filled out a request to withdraw my funds and then went to the NFA link to read the whole case, which clearly portrays a picture of FXLQ making up capital assets with an inexistant Bond from ABN ARMO BANK (one of EU's biggest banks).
Now, I was worried, so I decided to take the next plane to LAX at
8:00AM EST (I live in South Florida). I was in their office by 12:30
PM PST and everyone seemed to be working normally along with two auditors from NFA. After speaking to one person and another and waiting for several hours I was told that they had been denied permission by Jenifer Sunu, from NFA in Chicago to disburse any of my funds. Unfortunately, it was too late to call her in Chicago so I had to wait until the next. . During this time, several of the company executives met with me, including Robert Gray, and they explained how they have funds in different financial institutions in Europe and that the NFA did not want to accept this and ordered them to repatriate all these funds, which they were in the process of doing, but this was not an overnight ordeal. Robert Gray said that this order to repatriate funds had come in on Monday and the Member Responsibility Action, came
in the next day (Tuesday).
The following morning I started calling Jenifer Sunu and finally,
after about 4 hours of failed attempts, she finally picked up the
phone. After listening to everything she had to say, I practically
lost all hope of getting my money back, or at least the whole thing. The first thing I asked her was, why she had not authorized FXLQ from giving me my money back and she responded that the audit shows that there is ten million dollars deficiency. In other words, (her words) she said that my position was that of any creditor and had the same importance, legally, as the phone bill, and therefore, if there is a shortfall of 10 million dollars, the creditors would receive their funds in the proportional amount of what is "left". She gave me an example of when a "bankrupt" company dissolves. She even said that this was a done deal on their part. That it was out of their hands and that the CFTC had been notified for them to name a liquidator and dissolve the company and pay creditors with whatever funds are left and they (CFTC) would be in charge of any charges or legal actions against the principals and/or executives..... In short, not much hope.
As soon as I hung up with her, I took off to FXLQ and met with Robert Gray and told him my conversation with Ms. Sunu. He was outraged and immediately called his lawyer into his office and they called Ms. Sunu. While the attorney was trying to reach her, Robert showed me how they had already received two wires from Europe, one for over two million and the other one for a million something.
A few minutes later, the attorney came back to Robert Gray's office and said that Jenifer Sunu, was denying everything (several other customers had also called with similar stories, some where told that they would be lucky to get 50 cents on the dollar). So they asked me, if I wanted to talk to her, which of course I did. We put her on speaker phone and she started by saying that I had misunderstood her, she acknowledged that FXLQ had already received 2 multimillion dollar wires from their offshore accounts and that in no way was this a done deal on the part of the NFA, completely contradicting herself from my
earlier conversation.
This, in a way, gave me renewed expectations but at the same time it is really strange that the NFA would bad mouth the company to the extent of practically giving me a verbal "death certificate" and then when confronted with the "patient" takes everything said back. Why?
As far as my perception, to me FXLQ has always showed honesty and integrity, at least compared to a big list of other FXBrokers I have had accounts with. I had many experiences where they honored and fixed, to my benefit errors created by MT4. As far as my face to face meetings with them last Wednesday and Thursday, I get the feeling that they are truly trying to survive this ordeal and the proof is in the millions that they repatriated on Thursday, which shows that instead of folding they ARE actually bringing money in. They think, that ounce they come out of this NFA persecution, they will prove to be stronger than before, which is obviously true, BUT the question is, if they are able to prove that their financial solvency is adequate and in line with what was previously reported, will they be able to continue business as usual or will the damage caused by this whole ordeal be too deep to recover?
I'd like to also mention that I asked Ms. Sunu in my first
conversation, what good is their monthly FCM Financial Data Report, if the information in it is not reliable; She answered that all companies are audited every year, but it seems that documents that were accepted last year, are now questionable. So what good is basing your decisions on choosing a broker on this report if its validity is questionable.
In general, I prefer to have the NFA than nothing at all, as most
other countries, but it definitely needs a lot of work to be an real
and effective controlling organization.
UPDATE: I just got a call from one of the executives that told me that they received another four million (I did not ask if they received anything on Friday) and they had been trying to get the NFA to authorize the release of customer funds but had no positive response yet and they expected to get the authorization, hopefully, by tomorrow.
Regards,
CMA
During the examination NFA discovered that ODL had failed to prepare an accurate net capital computation as of March 31, 2006. ODL had improperly classified cash held at a Cayman Island bank as a current asset when it should have been classified as a non-current asset, failed to properly account for customer debits, netted customer debits against other credits in non-related customer accounts, and failed to the appropriate haircut charge on money market funds held at a brokerage firm. As a result, ODL overstated its net capital by approximately $448,000.
ODL failed to take the applicable concentration charge on transactions with both unaffiliated and affiliated counterparties. This failure resulted in an overstatement of ODL's net capital by approximately $1.3 million on March 31, 2006 net capital computation.
As a result of adjustments to ODL's capital computation resulting from the violations referenced above ODL failed to maintain the required minimum adjusted net capital as of March 31, 2006.
NFA's review of ODL's financial statements during the examination revealed that ODL had also failed to maintain the required minimum adjusted net capital as of April 30, 2006.
Subsequent to NFA's examination, ODL has consistently failed to maintain the required minimum adjusted net capital. Specifically, ODL's adjusted net capital fell under the required minimum on May 31, 2006, August 25, 2006, September 30, 2006, November 10, 2006, November 17, 2006, November 30, 2006, December 1, 2006, December 22, 2006, and January 19, 2007.
ODL and King were ordered to be jointly and severally liable for payment of a $165,000 fine. Dubuque was ordered to pay a $3,000 fine. In addition, Dubuque was ordered to tape record, for one year, all conversations between himself and existing or potential customers; retain the tapes for one year from the date they are created; and make the tapes available to NFA upon request.