Goldman Sachs Class Action
Zamansky & Associates has filed a class action complaint against Goldman Sachs and certain of its directors and officers for failing to disclose material information to shareholders. The complaint alleges that Goldman Sachs caused its stock to trade at artificially inflated prices during the period between January 2, 2007 and April 16, 2010 by failing to disclose material information regarding its ABACUS 2007-ACI CDO. The complaint further alleges that Goldman Sachs and its directors and officers failed to disclose that it received a Wells Notice from the SEC in approximately July 2009 regarding the SEC’s investigation into Goldman Sachs’ role in structuring the ABACUS CDO.
Investors who purchased Goldman Sachs common stock between January 2, 2007 and April 16, 2010 may be able to participate in the class and are urged to contact us using the form below. A copy of the complaint can be found here.
Goldman’s More than a Wall Street Toll Collector
Reuters : by on April 29, 2010
The Perils Of Letting A Relative Manage Your Money
by on January 29, 2010
In journalism they say three makes a trend and regretfully my office has identified a disturbing one relating to investors who let a family member manage their money. During the past few months we’ve been contacted by various individuals whose accounts were grossly mismanaged by a family member, including a father whose son put him into some investments that were patently unsuitable for his risk tolerance. The father has a compelling case, but he’s torn about filing a case against his own flesh and blood.
In theory, choosing a relative to manage your money makes sense on the belief that a relative is more likely to act in one’s best interest. Brokerage firms prey on this perception; when a broker enters the business he or she typically is instructed to contact family members to attract assets to the firm and build his or her book of business. It’s tough saying no to young Johnny or Jane when they politely hit you up for some assets to manage at the outset of their careers.
But it’s dangerous to assume that a family member always can –or will — serve a relative’s best interests. Brokers are under tremendous pressure to push commission-based products and often even they are not fully informed — and sometimes misled — by their bosses about the securities their firms are pressuring them to peddle. Auction rate securities and structured notes are but two egregious examples where brokers were pressured to sell products to clients without them fully understanding the risks.
Another risk is that brokerage firms don’t properly monitor the accounts brokers manage on behalf of relatives with the same diligence as regular accounts. Indeed, there have been several instances where brokers engaged in insider trading tried to avoid detection by parking securities in the accounts they managed on behalf of relatives. Even if a family member isn’t doing anything untoward, it’s best that your account be subject to the customary firm due diligence to ensure your goals and objectives are being followed.
But perhaps the biggest risk of all is that most investors are incredibly reluctant to sue a family member for mismanaging an account because it could potentially cause a major rift in the family. But I predict this is going to change, as the dramatic downturn in the market in 2008 dramatically eroded the life savings of many individual investors. Mark my words, there are going to be some rather extraordinary cases being filed in the months ahead involving parents and their children and other close family members.
Based on what I’m increasingly hearing, if you value the intimacy of holiday gatherings and special occasions, it’s best to keep family and money management separate.