Every month we release an Enforcement Roundup blog that highlights all of the notable securities law decisions related to BC residents in the previous month. We cover our completed regulatory cases and report on other self-regulatory organizations’ decisions when pertinent. From time-to-time, we also cover criminal cases related to our decisions or investigations.
This Enforcement Roundup contains two British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) enforcement decisions and one notice of hearing, as well as three Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada (MFDA) decisions.
A BCSC panel found that Dhala perpetrated a fraud on four investors and spent $26,900 of investor funds on personal expenses. The panel also found that Dhala lied to BCSC staff during an interview while under oath. During the interview, Dhala stated that he dealt with only one investor, which was not true. Dhala had received $38,250 from the four investors prior to the date of the interview.
The panel fined and permanently banned Dhala from the province’s capital markets for fraud and lying to a commission investigator. The panel also ordered that Dhala pay to the BCSC the $26,900 obtained as a result of his misconduct, as well as an administrative penalty of $125,000.
A BCSC panel has found that Alfredo Miguel “Michael” Yong, Inverlake Property Investment Goup Inc., and Wheatland Business Park Ltd. illegally distributed securities. In the same decision, the panel dismissed allegations of fraud against Yong, Inverlake, and Wheatland.
The panel found that Yong distributed securities in both Inverlake and Wheatland without a prospectus.
The panel directed the parties to make submissions on sanctions according to the schedule set out in the findings.
In the approved settlement agreement, Hufanda admitted to contravening MFDA rules when he invested money received from clients outside the Member firm and failed to account or repay the funds.
In the approved settlement agreement, Hufanda was permanently prohibited from conducting securities related business in any capacity while in the employ of, or associated with any MFDA member. As part of the agreement, Hufanda paid a fine in the amount of $10,000, and has paid costs in the amount of $2,500.
Cheung and Yeung admitted to contravening MFDA rules in separate settlement agreements.
Cheung is prohibited from acting in a compliance or supervisory capacity with a MFDA member for a period of three months. He has also paid a fine in the amount of $12,500, and costs in the amount of $2,500.
Yeung is prohibited from conducting securities related business in any capacity while in the employ of or associated with any MFDA Member for a period of two years, and has paid a fine in the amount of $2,500, and costs in the amount of $2,500.
After releasing its reasons for its decision in the matter of Aul, an MFDA panel imposed a permanent prohibition on the authority of Aul to conduct securities related business in any capacity while in the employ of, or associated with, any MFDA member. The panel also imposed a fine in the amount of $35,000, and costs in the amount of $2,500.
The panel found that Aul contravened multiple MFDA rules when she was working at a member firm. The panel also found that she provided false and misleading information to MFDA staff.
Access to more cases: