Dec 12, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Citizens, Inc. – SeekingAlpha Reports; Class Action Lawsuit Filed
On March 8, 2017, SeekingAlpha reported that “Citizens, Inc. (NYSE:CIA) uses a network of unregulated brokers to sell complex life insurance policies to foreign retail investors and retirees. The policies are sold through promises of outsized ‘guaranteed’ returns backed by U.S. Treasury bonds. However, the money is not invested in U.S. Treasuries and the policies appear designed to prop up Citizens’ stock price.”
SeekingAlpha further reported that
[b]ecause most of the returns to existing policyholders are driven by funds contributed by new policyholders, Citizens displays some characteristics that appear analogous to a Ponzi scheme. The performance of CIA shares drive the returns to existing policyholders, but these purported returns hinge directly on Citizens’ ability to prop up its stock price with a constant flow of new money from policyholders. [Emphasis in original]
The money is funneled from policyholders into Citizens’ stock through a feature in which a portion of premiums is paid back as benefits and “dividends.” These funds are routed to Citizens’ transfer agent who facilitates continuous purchases of CIA shares in the open market.
The dividend feature is structured so that most of the projected policy value hinges on the performance of CIA stock. But the inherent risks are often concealed from retail investors who are falsely told that most of their money is backed by U.S. Treasury Bonds inside “savings accounts” that will secure their retirement or children’s education.
On March 16, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed against Citizens, Inc. over alleged securities laws violations. The plaintiff alleges that Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Citizens’ brokers and pitchbooks falsely claimed that most of the funds from its insurance policies were directly invested in U.S. Treasury Bond; funds from Citizens’ insurance policies were funneled into continuous open market purchases that inflated Citizens’ stock price; and as a result, Defendants’ statements about Citizens’ business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
Citizens, Inc. Shareholders
If you are a Citizens, Inc. shareholder and wish to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn whether you may have legal claims against Citizens’ officers and directors, please complete the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected] or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Dec 12, 2017 | Blog
**FCC rules limit many types of robocalls, though some calls are permissible if prior consent is given.
**Rules differ between landline and wireless phones; however, calls and text messages have the same protection under FCC rules.
**Wireless and landline home phones are protected against telemarketing robocalls made without prior written consent from the recipient.
**An existing commercial relationship does not constitute permission to be robocalled or texted.
**Consent to be called or texted cannot be a condition of a sale or other commercial transaction.
**Consumers can take back their permission to be called or texted in any reasonable way. A calling company cannot require someone to fill out a form and mail it in as the only way to revoke consent.
**All non-emergency robocalls, both telemarketing and informational, require a consumer’s permission to be made to a wireless phone. These calls can include political, polling, and other non-telemarketing robocalls.
**Telemarketers and robocallers are allowed to call a wrong number only once before updating their lists. This most commonly comes up when someone who consented to be called or texted gave up that number, which was reassigned to someone else. Callers have resources available to them to help them know ahead of time if a number’s “owner” has changed.
**Urgent calls or texts specifically for health or fraud alerts may be allowed without prior consent. They must be free, and consumers can say “stop” at any time.
**Phone companies face no legal barriers to offering consumers the use of technologies that block robocalls to any phone. The FCC encourages companies to offer this resource.
FCC FAQs Regarding Robocalls, Autodialed & Prerecorded Calls
What are the rules for robocalls?
FCC rules require a business to obtain your written consent – on paper or through electronic means, including website forms, a telephone keypress – or a recording of your oral consent before it may make a prerecorded telemarketing call to your residential phone number or make an autodialed or prerecorded telemarketing call or text to your wireless number.
What are the consent requirements for telemarketers calling my landline?
Businesses must have your prior express written consent before making telemarketing robocalls. Telemarketers are no longer able to make telemarketing robocalls to your landline home telephone based solely on an “established business relationship” that you may have established when purchasing something from a business or contacting the business to ask questions.
Are robocalls to wireless phones permissible?
Your written or oral consent is required for ALL autodialed or prerecorded calls or texts made to your wireless number. Telemarketers have never been permitted to make robocalls to your wireless phone based solely on an “established business relationship” with you.
Do all prerecorded autodialed calls to my landline violate FCC rules?
Not always. Informational messages such as school closings or flight information are permissible without prior written consent.
What other autodialed calls are permitted under FCC robocall rules?
Market research or polling calls to residential wireline numbers are not restricted by FCC rules, nor are calls on behalf of tax-exempt non-profit groups. The rules do require all prerecorded calls, including market research or polling calls, to identify the caller at the beginning of the message and include a contact phone number. All autodialed or prerecorded non-emergency calls to wireless phones are prohibited without prior expressed consent, regardless of the call’s content.
Can I opt out of autodialed calls?
FCC rules require telemarketers to allow you to opt out of receiving additional telemarketing robocalls immediately during a prerecorded telemarketing call through an automated menu. The opt-out mechanism must be announced at the outset of the message and must be available throughout the duration of the call.
FCC FAQ’s: Robocalls, Autodialed Calls & Prerecorded Calls
Have You Received Unsolicited or Unwanted Telemarketing Calls, Autodialed Calls, Robocalls or Text Messages?
If you have received unwanted, unsolicited or harassing telemarketing telephone calls, autodial calls (“robocalls”) or text messages and would like to speak privately with an attorney to learn more about your potential legal rights, please complete the form to the right or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Dec 11, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Liberty Tax, Inc. (NASDAQ:TAX) – KPMG LLP Resigns as Independent Accounting Firm
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating whether Liberty Tax and certain of its officers or directors engaged in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices.
On December 11, 2017, Liberty Tax, Inc. issued a press release disclosing that KPMG LLP resigned as the independent registered public accounting firm of Liberty Tax and that Liberty Tax will delay the filing of its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2017.
According to Liberty Tax’s Form 8-K, dated December 11, 2017 (Liberty Tax_Form 8-K):
KPMG expressed to the Audit Committee and [Liberty Tax] management its concern that the actions of former Chief Executive Officer John T. Hewitt . . . have created an inappropriate tone at the top which leads to ineffective entity level controls over the organization. Prior to the termination of Mr. Hewitt’s employment as Chief Executive Officer of the Company on September 5, 2017, the Audit Committee oversaw an investigation of allegations of misconduct by Mr. Hewitt. In particular, KPMG noted that Mr. Hewitt took actions to replace two independent members of the Board around the time information relating to this investigation appeared in media reports. KPMG also noted that following the replacement by Mr. Hewitt of two Class B directors, the chair of the Audit Committee retired from the Board, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer announced her intention to resign from the Company, and another independent member of the Board announced that he would not stand for reelection at the Company’s next annual meeting. Further, KPMG was made aware that following his termination as Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Hewitt may have continued to interact with franchisees and area developers of the Company. Although Mr. Hewitt stated to KPMG during a meeting on November 9, 2017 that he would not reinsert himself into the management of the Company, in light of Mr. Hewitt’s actions and his ability to control the Board as the sole holder of the Class B common stock, KPMG informed the Audit Committee and management that it has concerns regarding the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as related to integrity and tone at the top and such matters should be evaluated as potential material weaknesses. [Emphasis Added]
Specifically, KPMG informed the Audit Committee and management that Mr. Hewitt’s past and continued involvement in the Company’s business and operations, including his continued interactions with franchisees and area developers of the Company, has led it to no longer be able to rely on management’s representations, and therefore has caused KPMG to be unwilling to be associated with the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In notifying the Company of its resignation, KPMG advised the Audit Committee and management that it is not aware of any information that cause it to question the integrity of current management, but rather that the structural arrangement by which Mr. Hewitt controls the Company is the cause of KPMG’s concerns. KPMG also noted that because certain information known to the Board regarding the reasons that the Board terminated Mr. Hewitt as Chief Executive Officer had not been disclosed to the current Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, KPMG was uncertain as to whether it could continue to rely on management’s representations. [Emphasis Added]
On this news, the share price of Liberty Tax fell sharply during intraday trading on December 11, 2017.
Have You Purchased or Acquired Liberty Tax Shares?
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Liberty Tax (NASDAQ:TAX) shares and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn whether you may have legal claims, please complete the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected] or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Dec 11, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Hilton Resorts Corporation, d/b/a Hilton Grand Vacations – Class Action Filed
On December 5, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, seeking damages and other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by Hilton Resorts Corporation, d/b/a Hilton Grand Vacations.
According to the class action complaint, Defendant Hilton Resorts Corporation, d/b/a Hilton Grand Vacations, “a business engaged in the sale of vacation timeshares and other hospitality services,” began in or around September 2016 contacting the Plaintiff’s cellular telephone in an effort to solicit the Plaintiff to purchase the services of Hilton Grand Vacations. Allegedly, the Plaintiff, who received multiple solicitation calls from Hilton Grand Vacations, revoked consent to call her cellular telephone in or about January 2017 “by expressly requesting Defendant to cease soliciting their services through calling Plaintiff on her cellular telephone.”
Defendant Hilton Resorts Corporation, d/b/a Hilton Grand Vacations, according to the complaint, used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact the Plaintiff to solicit its services from, among others, telephone numbers (407) 404-7353, (407) 404-7361, (403) 745-3152, (407) 745-3249, (407) 745-3219, and (407) 745-3208. Further, Hilton Grand Vacations did not have the Plaintiff’s prior express consent to receive telephone calls utilizing an automatic dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice. Additionally, the Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number was added to the National Do-Not-Call Registry on or about August 9, 2003.
The proposed TCPA class action lawsuit was brought on behalf of all persons in the United States who received any solicitation/telemarketing telephone calls from Hilton Resorts Corporation, d/b/a Hilton Grand Vacations, to such person’s cellular telephone made through the use of any automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice and such person had not previously consented, or had revoked any prior express consent, to receive such calls within the four years prior to the filing of the class action complaint.
The proposed TCPA class action lawsuit also was brought on behalf all persons in the United States registered on the National Do-Not-Call Registry for at least 30 days, who did not grant Defendant Hilton Resorts Corporation, d/b/a Hilton Grand Vacations, prior express consent, did not have a prior established business relationship, or who revoked consent and any prior established business relationship, and received more than one call made by or on behalf of the Defendant that promoted Defendant Hilton Grand Vacations’ products or services, within any 12-month period, within four years prior to the filing of the class action complaint.
Have You Received Unsolicited or Harassing Telephone, Telemarketing, Autodial or Robocalls or Text Messages?
If you have received unwanted, unsolicited or harassing telephone, telemarketing, autodial or robocalls and/or text messages and would like to speak privately with an attorney to learn more about your potential legal rights, please complete the form to the right or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Dec 11, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating claims on behalf of investors to determine whether Banc of California and certain of its officers or directors engaged in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices.
On December 8, 2017, Bloomberg reported:
Banc of California Inc., the lender under investigation by U.S. regulators after a short seller linked it to an imprisoned con man, inflated profits and ignored a top executive using company funds to pay for strippers, according to a whistle-blower lawsuit.
A management decision to reverse accrued employee bonuses caused the company to improperly carry over revenues generated in 2016 to make it look more profitable this year, according to the lawsuit filed Thursday by Heather Endresen, who was most recently a managing director for the bank’s Small Business Administration’s loan program. Endresen said she was wrongfully terminated after complaining about the shifting pool of bonuses as well as the behavior of the company’s then-chief financial officer Francisco Turner.
Turner used company funds to pay for strippers and had sex with employees in his office, according to the complaint. He also used drugs and pressured junior employees to join him, Endresen alleged.
On this news, Banc of California’s share price fell $0.60, or 2.76%, to close at $21.15 on December 8, 2017.
Have You Purchased or Acquired Banc of California Shares?
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Banc of California (NYSE:BANC) shares and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn whether you may have legal claims, please complete the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected] or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
