A former brokerage client has sued JPMorgan Chase & Co for steering him and other investors to funds, which were both underperforming and overpriced. The complaint alleges that JPMorgan did this with knowledge to boost the fees and profits of the bank. The lawsuit, which seeks class action, mentions that JPMorgan had falsely represented its financial advisers that they were under fiduciary duty to clients, while at the same time its bonuses encouraged the sale of proprietary funds.
The lawsuit was filed in New York Supreme Court in Manhattan following a report published on July 2 by the New York Times that exposed and called into question some practices of JPMorgan.
The lawsuit further alleges that JPMorgan’s marketing materials emphasized “inflated, hypothetical returns” and carefully suppressed a “much less rosy” scenario of actual performance.
 |
|||
 |
|
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!! |
|
After the housing boom burst, JPMorgan had turned to proprietary funds and investments to compensate for its rapidly declining profits, alleges the lawsuit. Apparently, the strategy allowed JPMorgan to collect double fees for management and sales.
The lawsuit also mentioned that the sales practices of JPMorgan in the alleged matter is being currently investigated by the SEC, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and the Manhattan District Attorney.
In an interview with the media, FINRA spokeswoman Nancy Condon affirmed the fact and said, “We’re looking at it.”
The case is Alan H. Tralins v. JPMorgan Chase & Co, New York state Supreme Court, No. 652448/2012, New York County.
Posted by EmploymentCrossing
on July 17, 2012. Filed under Business News,JPMorgan.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Attorney Career Resources is sponsored by BCG Attorney Search, the nation's leading placement firm, specializing in law firm placements.
Law firms of all sizes are being much more selective about who makes equity partner. Gone are the days where doing good work and putting in your time is enough to get you to a profit sharing level. Today, equity partners almost always have to prove that they can contribute their share to the firm. So what does this mean for associates and how can a two-tiered partnership track be beneficial? With a two-tiered partnership structure, associates get more time to prove themselves and also more time to determine whether partnership is the right goal for them. Two-tier partnerships (non-equity and equity) exist so the firm can train and develop associates into equity partners. The non-equity track to partner at most firms is on average, 6 years long. [...]
May 16, 2013 Read More
 |
||
| Search Thousands of Legal Jobs | ||
|
Job Type: |
||
 |
||
|
Browse Jobs by Location: |
||
|
||
| Keyword Search: | ||
|
||
Recent comments