Investors," Page 112), says bankruptcy trustees in general are carefully screened for conflicts and wouldn'tnormally be allowed to retain their own law firms. But SIPA condones such practice, so bankruptcy judges goalong, he says.Harbeck doesn't buy that argument. He says that bankruptcy courts review each of SIPC's trustees to make surehey are "disinterested parties" under the definition of SIPA. SIPC and the bankruptcy courts carefully evaluaterustees for their familiarity with bankruptcy law "first and foremost," their experience in the securities industry andhe firm's resources (are they large enough to handle the case in question), Harbeck says.John Burns, a Greenbelt, Md., attorney and chairman of the bankruptcy committee of the American Bar Association's young lawyer's section, says there's no conflict with trustees using their own law firm and that it iscustomary practice in bankruptcy cases.Harbeck insists that SIPC picks its law firms, not the trustee, and that it's cheaper not having two separate entitiescoordinating a case. He says both SIPC and the bankruptcy courts scrutinize trustee expenses carefully.SIPC boasts that it has returned roughly 2.6 billion dollars to investors since SIPC's formation in 1970 whilespending just 111 million dollars on trustee expenses over that period.But those billions are assets returned to investors. What has SIPC recovered from litigating against alleged debtorsof failed brokerages? The corporation can't say.Denying Claims PIABA President Mark Maddox claims that SIPC is being run "like a for-profit insurance company,doing everything in its power to deny claims rather than protect investor assets." He says just nine investors of 3,368 making claims in the Stratton Oakmont liquidation have received cash or securities. In fact, Maddox says herepresents hundreds of clients in the Stratton Oakmont case who have been denied by SIPC because they did notcomplain about unauthorized trades in writing within 10 days.The NASD expelled Stratton Oakmont and its owner from the industry in 1996 after repeated violations, includingunauthorized trading.Maddox, an Indianapolis-based attorney and former Indiana securities commissioner, claims SIPC's written-complaint requirement has made it impossible for investors to recover money from failed bucket shops. "This is arequirement that SIPC and its trustees have made up, that does not exist in the statute or the rules," he says."They made it up to prevent investors from recovering on claims."But Harbeck says that is nonsense. "What we are asking for, and what Mr. Maddox has not provided in mostinstances, is some reasonably contemporaneous written evidence that his clients objected to a transaction," hesays. "We have never failed to pay a documented claim-ever. ... I think we would be subject to much greater criticism if we paid undocumented claims with quasi-public funds."Maddox remains unsatisfied. He says that Stratton Oakmont clients have filled out claim forms and signed swornaffidavits attesting to the unauthorized trades. Furthermore, Stratton Oakmont was required to tape record all clientelephone conversations during its last two or three years in existence so SIPC could easily confirm theunauthorized trades if it really wanted to, he says.Time for Overhaul? PIABA has asked Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., to re-examine SIPC's mandate. Dingell haspassed that request on to both the General Accounting Office and the SEC for further review. Maddox says heexpects a GAO investigation and a report by late 2001.The GAO is in the "initial planning stages" of the SIPC-specific study, Maddox says.A broader GAO study on unpaid arbitration awards, which will include some mention of SIPC, was to be completearound Registered Representative's press time in mid-April."I believe that a lot of the issues we've been complaining about for the past couple of years are going to be foundo be true," Maddox says. "And then I believe Congress will feel that some action is appropriate."SIPC doesn't always protect investors who've been taken. Sometimes it sues them.In March 1997, W.S. Clearing (WSC) of Glendale, Calif., closed its doors when its largest introducing firm left it withan unpaid margin debt of 7.5 million dollars. SIPC then came in to liquidate the clearing firm.SC's fatal problem was 900,000 shares of illegally margined Data Race stock held by the introducing firm,Cygnet Securities of Waldwick, N.J. The stake amounted to 18 percent of outstanding shares, which Cygnet heldin both its own and customer accounts.Regulators investigating both firms heard testimony that customers had verbally complained about unauthorizedrades. Investigators also found that Cygnet owner George Swan owned 171,000 Data Race shares-some of it inan account with only 1 percent equity. It turns out that Cygnet, with WSC's cooperation, had ignored margin callsfor almost a year.hat's more, in testimony taken by SIPC's attorneys, WSC owner William Saydein admitted making and arrangingloans to keep Cygnet and its trading scheme going.The SEC has barred Saydein from the securities business. Swan was censured and fined 170,000 dollars by theNASD for parking Data Race in customer accounts. And SIPC is pursuing Swan for the Data Race debt.But SIPC is also suing Cygnet customers, claiming they owe 5.7 million dollars for Data Race trades made in their accounts. A bankruptcy judge this past October found that the customers are indeed liable for the debt.Tom Harris, an Irvine, Calif., attorney representing 12 of the investors, says his clients owe nothing. He claims hisclients never invested more than 200,000 dollars in total, never received a single margin call and, in fact, hadnegative equity at the time Data Race was first purchased.Harris says the court failed to consider all the evidence of fraud. He is appealing the case in federal court and hascomplained to regulators and Congress about what he feels is an abuse of power by SIPC in suing the investors.SIPC won't comment on the case. But it argued in court that the customer debts were "straightforward contract
MOST POPULAR STORIESSweating The CFPExclusive: UBS Reorganizes, MakesManagement ChangesThe Pros and Cons of AnnuitiesMerrill Plans Trainee Hiring SpreeUBS Reorgainzes Wealth ManagementDivision (update)
Elite Financial Teams
Elite Financial Teams
is based on twostudies commissioned by
on how financialteams.
Elite Financial Teams
for anyone looking to:Refine team roles and responsibilitiesDevelop more efficient practice managementBring in more affluent clientsCreate client service models suitable for theaffluent...