the following information was copied off the official CFTC website.
CFTC TRADE COMMISSION
Enforcement Press Releases
The CFTC is a private agency that acts as industry regulators. They file actions against violators and collect money for the following 5 purposes-
- loan payoff
- civil penalties
Restitution and loan payoffs get paid out
The penalties, fines, and sanctions are kept by them. I added up how much of this category of money they collected from Jan , 2013 to May 31, 2013 – a total of 5 months.
TOTAL MONEY COLLECTED FOR FINES $462,907,959.00
THAT’S JUST SHY OF $463 MILLION in 5 months! (can you imagine their pay checks!)
463 million that means they gross over 1 BILLION a year. Operating costs can’t justify this level of GREED.
At the same time- victims are getting shorted in restitution. The shortage is being taken by the CFTC. They often pay themselves equal to the victims-
This isn’t like collecting insurance money from an accident! Its acceptable for the lawyers to keep half because the money is being paid for suffering- it’s not a repayment of money lost. The CFTC is acting like its ok to short people of money that was stolen from them! This isn’t ok.
Over and over cases read like this:
- funds involving at least $22.5 million.
- pay restitution of $11,437,573 to defrauded customers.
- civil monetary penalty of over $11.4 million
Customers lost 22.5 million but get back only half! WHY? Because the CFTC TOOK THE OTHER 11.4 million for themselves! This is just wrong!!!
- accepted more than $4.7 million from retail public customers
- restitution of approximately $3.2 million to defrauded customers
- a $1.5 million civil monetary penalty.
So why do the victims get shorted by 1.5 million ? Why does the CFTC get to take the 1.5 million that would have paid them back in full? This is unjust!
- solicited more than $1.3 million
- pay $1,146,000 in restitution to their defrauded customers
- and a $1,337,000 civil monetary penalty
That means customers were shorted by 154k while the CFTC kept 1.3 million. How is this acceptable? case link (http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr6690-13)
copied from the nfa website
resource link: http://www.nfa.futures.org/news/newsRel.asp?ArticleID=4291
September 04, 2013
NFA takes emergency enforcement action against California firm Newport Private Capital LLC, Jonathan M. Hansen, the firm’s principal, and David M. Giunta, a former principal of the firm
September 4, Chicago – National Futures Association (NFA) announced today that it has taken an emergency enforcement action against Newport Private Capital LLC (Newport Private Capital), a registered commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor and NFA Member located in Newport Beach, California; Jonathan M. Hansen (Hansen), an associated person and listed principal of Newport Private Capital; and David M. Giunta (Giunta), a former listed principal and associated person of Newport Private Capital.
NFA has taken the Member Responsibility Action (MRA) and Associate Responsibility Action (ARA) to protect customers of Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta because they have failed to fulfill their financial obligations to participants in the Financial Futures Fund, a commodity pool they operate.
Specifically, the Financial Futures Fund loaned $4 million via a Promissory Note dated March 1, 2009 to the Sure Fund, a real estate fund operated by Solidus Land Company, LLC, an entity operated, in part, by Hansen and Giunta, as managing members, and owned by a principal of Newport Private Capital, Newport Private Capital Holdings LLC, of which Hansen and Giunta each had a 50% ownership interest. Giunta executed the Promissory Note as “Manager of Sure Fund, LLC,” and Sure Fund subsequently defaulted on the Promissory Note in 2012. Currently the Promissory Note remains unpaid with monies due to the Financial Futures Fund totaling approximately $6.1 million, including accrued interest.
At the time that Giunta executed the Promissory Note on behalf of Sure Fund, Hansen and Giunta also executed unconditional personal guarantees to repay the loan in the event Sure Fund defaulted on the Promissory Note. To date, despite the Sure Fund’s 2012 default of the Promissory Note, neither Hansen nor Giunta have satisfied their personal guarantees.
The MRA/ARA orders Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta to repay in full any monies borrowed plus accrued interest pursuant to the Promissory Note on or before January 15, 2014. In addition, Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Guinta and any other person acting on behalf of them will be prohibited from soliciting or accepting any funds from customers or for any managed accounts or commodity pools until Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta have submitted new disclosure document(s) to NFA containing information about the Member and Associate Responsibility Actions, which have been accepted by NFA.
The MRA/ARA also prohibits Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta from permitting any commodity pool they operate or control to use any means to make any direct or indirect loans or advances of pool assets to Newport Private Capital, Hansen or Giunta or any other person or entity affiliated with Newport Private Capital, Hansen or Giunta. They are also prohibited from disbursing or transferring any funds (other than to margin existing positions) from any trading accounts controlled by any of them or from any pool accounts (including bank, trading or any other types of accounts) without prior approval from NFA.
In the event that Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta fail to comply with any of the requirements set forth in the MRA/ARA, they and any other person acting on behalf of them will be prohibited from placing trades for any pools that they operate or accounts that they own or control or which are held in either of their names, except for liquidation of existing positions.
The MRA/ARA will remain in effect until such time as Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta have demonstrated to the satisfaction of NFA that they are in complete compliance with all NFA Requirements.
Newport Private Capital, Hansen and Giunta may request a hearing before NFA’s Hearing Committee.
copied from cftc website
resource link http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr6676-13
August 26, 2013
Federal Court in Maryland Orders Sidney J. Charles, Jr. and his Company, The Borrowing Station, LLC, to pay over $600,000 to Settle CFTC Forex Fraud Action
Washington, DC — The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today announced that it obtained a federal court consent Order of permanent injunction requiring Defendants Sidney J. Charles, Jr., formerly of Bowie, Maryland, and his company, The Borrowing Station, LLC (Borrowing Station) of Bowie, Maryland, jointly and severally to pay $254,236 in restitution and a $350,000 civil monetary penalty in connection with an off-exchange leveraged foreign currency (forex) Ponzi scheme.
The Order, entered on August 23, 2013, by Judge Paul W. Grimm of the U.S. District Court of the District of Maryland, also imposes permanent registration and trading bans against both Defendants and prohibits them from further violations of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations, as charged. The court’s Order stems from a CFTC complaint filed on April 23, 2012, that charged Defendants with solicitation fraud, misappropriation, issuing false statements, and registration violations (see CFTC Press Release 6247-12).
The Order finds that, from at least October 2009 through at least July 2011, Defendants fraudulently solicited $369,326 from 18 individuals or entities for participation in a pooled investment vehicle managed by Borrowing Station, through Charles, that traded forex. According to the Order, Defendants solicited pool participants directly and through a website. In their solicitations, Defendants promised substantial investment returns such as 25 percent per year or 10 percent per month, and falsely claimed that pool participant funds were guaranteed against trading losses. The Order finds that Defendants deposited only a portion of pool participant funds into trading accounts and lost a majority of those funds unsuccessfully trading forex.
The Order also finds that Defendants issued checks to pool participants that represented purported “monthly returns” or “return on investment.” However, any purported profits that Defendants paid to pool participants came from the principal of other pool participants in the manner of a Ponzi scheme. In addition, Charles misappropriated pool participant funds to pay for personal expenses and to fund Borrowing Station’s operations, according to the Order.
The Order further finds that Borrowing Station and Charles failed to register as a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and Associated Person of a CPO, respectively, as required under the CEA and CFTC Regulations.
The CFTC appreciates the assistance of the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority.
CFTC Division of Enforcement staff responsible for this case are Kara Mucha, Kassra Goudarzi, Michael Solinsky, Gretchen L. Lowe, and Vincent A. McGonagle.
Last Updated: August 26, 2013
copied from cftc website
August 22, 2013
CFTC Files Action to Revoke Registration of Commodity Trading Advisor Prestige Capital Advisors, LLC
Washington, DC– The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today filed a Notice of Intent (Notice) to revoke the registration of Prestige Capital Advisors, LLC (Prestige) of Charlotte, North Carolina, as a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA).
The CFTC Notice alleges that Prestige is subject to statutory disqualification from CFTC registration based on an Order of default judgment and permanent injunction entered against Prestige in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina on January 25, 2013 (see CFTC Press Release 6615-13). The Order finds that Prestige fraudulently solicited and accepted more than $4.7 million from multiple pool participants for investment in one or more commodity pools that traded among other things, commodities and futures contracts. The Order also finds that Prestige misappropriated pool participant funds, posted false trading returns on a website called BarclayHedge (where fund managers could post unverified historical returns for prospective clients to view), sent false trading results to at least one Prestige pool participant, and issued false account statements. As a result, Prestige was ordered to pay approximately $6.9 million in civil monetary penalties and restitution of over $4.1 million.
CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members responsible for this case are Eugenia Vroustouris, Daniel Jordan, Michael Loconte, Erica Bodin, Rick Glaser, and Richard Wagner.
Last Updated: August 22, 2013