The Hedge Fund Law Report

The definitive source of actionable intelligence on hedge fund law and regulation

Articles By Topic

By Topic: Monitors

  • From Vol. 9 No.16 (Apr. 21, 2016)

    District Court Order Threatens Confidentiality of Compliance Monitor Reports

    Reports of compliance monitors retained in accordance with corporate settlements have generally been kept out of public view – until now. Finding that a compliance monitor’s report is a judicial record and the public has a First Amendment right to see it, Judge John Gleeson of the Eastern District of New York granted, in large part, the pro se request of an HSBC mortgage customer to unseal the first annual report of the compliance monitor HSBC retained in connection with its $1.9 billion settlement with the DOJ. The matter is stayed pending appeal. As settlements frequently require engaging a compliance monitor, this decision carries implications for any hedge fund manager or other investment adviser entering into such a settlement. For SEC enforcement actions resulting in monitorships, see “Repeat Custody Rule Offenders Face Severe SEC Sanctions” (Dec. 10, 2015); “Inadequate Disclosure of Expense Allocations May Carry Unintended Consequences” (May 14, 2015); and “SEC Settlement Emphasizes the Importance – and Limits – of Fund and Transaction Disclosure” (Apr. 2, 2015).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 2 No.37 (Sep. 17, 2009)

    Trabulse Case Illustrates a Monitor’s Considerable Discretion to Grant, Deny or Modify Investor Claims in the Wake of a Hedge Fund Fraud

    On September 26, 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused hedge fund manager Alexander James Trabulse, and various entities with which he was associated, including the Fahey Fund, L.P. (the Fahey Fund or the Fund); Fahey Financial Group, Inc.; International Trade & Data; and ITD Trading (Relief Defendants), of defrauding investors by drastically overstating the Fund’s returns and profitability.  Specifically, the SEC alleged that Trabulse sent account statements to investors in the Fund that inflated the Fund’s returns by as much as 200%, while using investor money to purchase cars and finance shopping sprees for his family members.  As a result, the SEC charged him with violating various antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws.  On December 7, 2007, the SEC obtained an order from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California that included (1) a preliminary injunction and (2) appointment of a monitor to oversee the operations of the Relief Defendants.  The SEC enjoined Trabulse from future violations of the federal securities laws and ordered that he pay $250,001 in disgorgement and penalties.  See SEC v. Trabulse, 526 F.Supp.2d 1008 (N.D. Cal. 2007).  The monitor has since allowed 115 claims, in whole or in part, totaling approximately $13.9 million.  This article discussed the claims review process crafted by the monitor, and illustrates the equitable power of a monitor to grant, deny or modify claims made by investors in the wake of a hedge fund fraud.  The case is illustrative precisely because of the typicality of certain of the claims faced by the monitor – including claims involving valuation, inadequate documentation and claimed withdrawals in excess of principal invested.

    Read Full Article …