SEC Tells Financial Firms That Settling Without Denying or Admitting to Wrongdoing is No Longer Allowed in Certain Securities Cases

Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Jo White recently announced that defendants in certain securities cases would no longer be allowed to accompany an agreement to settle with the statement that they are doing so but without admitting or denying wrongdoing. Speaking to a columnist with The New York Times, White said that in certain instances, admissions are necessary for there to be public accountability. However, White also did say that most SEC cases still would be settled under the “nether admit nor deny standard,” which provides the accused incentive to settle while compensation to victims sooner.

The new policy was announced to SEC enforcement staff last week in a memo from George Canellos and Andrew Ceresney, the regulator’s enforcement division co-leaders. They went on to say that in cases that warrant such an admission, if the accused were to refuse then a securities lawsuit might be the next step.

Securities cases that require admissions of wrongdoing will have to satisfy certain criteria, such as intentional misconduct that was egregious, wrongdoing that hurt a lot of investors or put them at risk of serious financial harm, or unlawful obstruction of the Commission’s investigation.

“This policy change is long overdue,” said SSEK Founder and Stockbroker Fraud Lawyer William Shepherd. “Over the past decade, the SEC has accommodated the targets it has been investigating far too often. Only rarely is there the requirement of admission of wrongdoing, and almost never for large financial firms and their management. When one is caught with a hand in the cookie jar, it’s time to say ‘I did it and I’m sorry, rather than “I neither admit nor deny it was my hand.”

The change policy comes in the wake of complaints that the SEC has been to lax with its enforcement, especially when it came to pursuing securities fraud cases against large financial institutions involved in the economic crisis, such as JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC) and Citigroup (C), which all settled cases against them without denying or admitting guilt. Having to admit wrongdoing potentially could hurt financial firms because plaintiffs in private securities cases and class action fraud litigation may then cite the acknowledgement of culpability, thereby strengthening their claims. This could force banks to have to pay out millions of dollars than if they hadn’t admitted to doing anything wrong.

S.E.C. Has a Message for Firms Not Used to Admitting Guilt, Stockbroker Fraud Law Firm, NY Times, June 22, 2013

Defense Bar Reacts With Dismay At Revision of SEC ‘No Admit/Deny’ Policy, Bloomberg/BNA, June 20, 2013

Securities and Exchange Commission

More Blog Posts:
CBOE Will Pay $6M Penalty Over SEC Charges Alleging Failure to Enforce Trading Rules, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, June 12, 2013
Controversial Democratic Appointee Pushes SEC for Less Talk About Investor and Securities Market Protections and More Action, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 28, 2013

NASAA President Pushes for State Regulation of “Reg A Plus” and for Private Lawsuits Over Small Offerings, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, May 28, 2013

At Shepherd, Smith, Edwards, and Kantas, our securities fraud lawyers work with clients that have sustained investment losses due to the misconduct, wrongdoing, or errors committed by a brokerage firm, an investment adviser, a broker, or another investment representative. We have helped thousands of investors get their money back through arbitration and litigation.

It is important for claimants to have their own securities cases, rather than opting to go with a class action, because this generally increases their chances of recovering more (if not all) of their losses.