Discussion of Investment Fraud in Utah on KSL’s Sunday Edition with Doug Wright

Editor’s note: I was interviewed on KSL’s Sunday Edition with Doug Wright last week. The discussion about Ponzi Schemes and affinity fraud in Utah happens at 8:18. I appreciate KSL Television’s willingness to engage in a frank discussion about why affinity fraud is a particularly vexing problem here in Utah, and to help get the word out on how to prevent these scams.

My Interview with ‘Trib Talk’ on Why Utah is Home to So Many Ponzi Schemes

‘Trib Talk’: Why is Utah home to so many Ponzi schemes?

(Steve Griffin | Tribune file photo)

Editor’s Note: This is an interview I did yesterday for the “Trib Talk” podcast from the The Salt Lake Tribune .

The sentencing of convicted fraudster Rick Koerber was delayed — again — this week, adding another chapter to a 10-year legal saga for one of Utah’s most notable Ponzi schemes.

But while the Koerber case is unique for its circuitous route to justice, Koerber’s underlying crimes and use of religion to target victims, are relatively common in The Beehive State, according to national statistics and the experience of local attorneys.

On this week’s episode of “Trib Talk” Tribune legal affairs reporter Jessica Miller and Salt Lake City attorney Mark Pugsley join Benjamin Wood to discuss Utah’s high rate of Ponzi schemes and why the state’s residents are particularly vulnerable to affinity fraud.

Click here to listen now. Listeners can also subscribe to “Trib Talk” on SoundCloudiTunes and Apple Podcasts, Google PlayStitcherSpotify and other major podcast platforms.

“Trib Talk” is produced by Sara Weber with additional editing by Dan Harrie. Comments and feedback can be sent to tribtalk@sltrib.com, or to @bjaminwood or @tribtalk on Twitter.

Finally It’s Confirmed: Utah Has More Ponzi Schemes Per Capita Than Any State in the Country. By Far.

I frequently speak to groups about investment fraud and one of the questions I often get asked is whether it’s true that Utah has the highest rate of Ponzi schemes and affinity fraud in the country.

In the past I haven’t been able to say for sure.  There aren’t any good studies that have reached that conclusion, and so I have to just rely on anecdotal evidence. 

Well, now we have proof.  Jordan Maglich, who runs the website PonziTracker.com, just released an epic ten-year survey of Ponzi schemes in the United States.  He found that there were over 800 Ponzi schemes reported publicly from 2008-2018 and that they collectively caused a jaw-dropping $60 billion in financial destruction.  I believe this is the first database compiling publicly-reported Ponzi schemes and sentences during the “Madoff Era.”

And the survey contains very bad news for Utahns.  Utah had the sixth-highest number of Ponzi schemes despite ranking 31st in population.  So when I ran a per-capita analysis of the numbers Jordan reported it turns out that Utah has the highest rate of Ponzi schemes per capita in the country by far, at 1.35 Ponzi schemes per 100,000 people.  And the next highest state (Florida) is nearly two thirds lower at .51 per 100,000 people.  (Chart)

If you take out the massive Madoff Ponzi scheme in New York ($17 billion), Utah also has the highest loss per capita of $502 per person – which is more than double the next highest state! 

Overall, Utah investors lost over $1.5 billion to these schemes in the last ten years.  And that number does not include other affinity frauds and other investment scams which undoubtedly account for another $500 million in losses to Utah residents over the last ten years (at least). 

How would $2 billion benefit our economy?  What is the collateral impact of these scams?  Here are a few thoughts:

  • Millions in state and federal resources are consumed by the victims of fraud who no longer have means to support themselves in retirement, including paying their medical bills and other living costs.
  • The families of fraud victims often have to step in to house and support their parents or children who have been wiped out financially.
  • Banks, investment advisors and stock brokers lose significant revenue when people liquidate their IRAs and 401K to invest with some unlicensed scammer.

The list goes on… 

Why is Utah’s problem so much worse than any other state?

This is a complicated problem, and there is no clear answer.  But after helping people recover losses from investment fraud for 25 years my view is that people in Utah are simply too trusting, particularly when the person soliciting an investment is in their ward or shares their religious affiliation.

If someone pitching you an investment casually mentions that they used to be the bishop or in some other church position, watch out!  Church callings and temple worthiness are not relevant to investment decisions, so beware of those who bring these issues up in an investment pitch.

Also, it may seem like doing business with someone you know and trust would be safer, but that is simply not true.  All investing involves risk, and just because you trust the individual soliciting the investment does not mean that the investment itself is good.  Trust but verify; and if things go badly do not hesitate to aggressively protect your interests.

Finally, investment decisions should never be made based on feelings.  Just because it feels legitimate, or feels like a good idea does not make it so. 

Here are a few things you can do to avoid getting scammed:

Do your homework.  Run a simple Google search on the company and its managers, or the individual pitching the investment.  You might be surprised by what you find. 

Hire an attorney. An experienced lawyer can help you perform due diligence into the company and individuals offering a private investment.  You need to carefully evaluate the risks and determine whether the offering complies with state and federal statutes.  It is far cheaper to hire an attorney on the front end of an investment like this – when your money is gone it gets very expensive. 

Get it in writing.  I am amazed how often people will give hundreds of thousands of dollars to someone on nothing more than a handshake.  The terms of your deal should always be put in writing, and those terms should be reviewed by the competent attorney you hired. 

Read the Paperwork.  Investors in a private investment opportunity should receive a detailed lengthy disclosure document called a private placement memorandum (PPM).  Take the time to review it before you invest.  Like a prospectus, a PPM contains detailed information about all aspects of the business including the business model, financial history, risk factors, biographical information on the managers, and the terms and conditions of the private investment, among other things.  If you don’t understand these things, hire a professional who does.

Work through licensed stock brokers or investment advisors. Even private (unregistered) investments generally need to be sold by licensed stock brokers.  Every investor should look at the employment and disciplinary history of their broker or investment adviser, which is available on FINRA’s BrokerCheck website

And most importantly, if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. If you are thinking about putting money into an alternative, unregistered, or unusual investment that promises abnormally high returns (like anything higher than 10 to 15% per year), watch out.  And if someone promises you a “guaranteed” return on any investment that ought to be a red flag — investments are rarely guaranteed and investments that offer unusually high returns are more risky, not less. 

State Population Schemes Schemes per 100,000 people Total Losses Losses per capita
Utah 3,101,833 42 1.35 $1,558,325,000 $502.39
Florida 20,984,400 107 0.51 $5,893,496,000 $280.85
New York* 19,849,399 90 0.45 $21,707,050,000 $1,093.59
Illinois 12,802,023 53 0.41 $523,400,000 $40.88
Calif 39,536,653 151 0.38 $3,889,700,000 $98.38
Texas 28,304,596 76 0.27 $8,372,900,000 $295.81
*New York (without Madoff) 19,849,399 89 0.45 $4,307,050,000 $216.99

NOTE: The per capita analysis in this table is mine.  The underlying data comes from this website:  Ten Years After Madoff, Updated Ponzi Database Shows Schemes Are Thriving

Copyright © 2019 by Mark W. Pugsley. All rights reserved.

The Growing Problem With Sales of Unregistered Securities

Recently I have been busy working to recover losses for a large number of investors who lost money in unregistered investments offered by Woodbridge and Future Income Payments or FIP. In many cases these investments were recommended by insurance agents who were not licensed to sell securities, and did not perform adequate due-diligence on these companies before they made the recommendation.

FIP offered pensioners upfront, lump-sum payments in return for a portion of their monthly pension payments over a specific term, often three to five years. FIP then used these pension payments to fund a monthly income stream back to the investors who put up the money for the lump-sum payments. In July of 2018 Scott Kohn, the 64-year-old felon who started the company, closed the doors and disappeared leaving investors with more than $100 million in losses.

Subsequently the SEC filed charges against thirteen individuals and ten companies who recommended and sold Woodbridge, including Utah-based Aaron Andrew and Live Abundant. Live Abundant and its agents were not licensed to sell securities, and yet they recommended both FIP and Woodbridge to hundreds of people here in Utah and throughout the western United States. Our lawsuits against Live Abundant and the individuals and entities who perpetrated this scheme are ongoing.

The common link between these two fraud schemes is that investments in FIP and Woodbridge were not registered with the SEC. These are sometimes referred to as private placements or unregistered offerings.  Generally, a company may not offer or sell securities in the United States unless the offering has been registered with the SEC or an exemption from registration is available. For more information about exempt offerings I recommend you look at this article on the SEC’s website.

Below is a repost of an article from Investment News that highlights some of the challenges for individual investors from these investments, and for the firms that offer them.


Sales of Unregistered Securities are a Growing Problem That’s Harming Investors — and the Industry

By Bruce Kelly

To an investor, Castleberry Financial Services Group’s promise of up to a 12.2% annual yield on the alternative investment fund it was selling might have seemed awfully tempting. So might the assurance that your principal would be insured and bonded by well-known insurance companies CNA Financial Corp. and Chubb Group.

In promotional materials, Castleberry claimed to have invested almost $800 million in local South Florida companies and to have a portfolio of real estate holdings that was generating $2.8 million in rental income annually.

But in late February, the Securities and Exchange Commission went into court to shut the company down, claiming it was all a fraud, including the involvement of CNA and Chubb.

Before the SEC acted, though, it said that Castleberry had managed to raise $3.6 million from investors, some of which was used to pay the personal expenses of its principals. Other funds were transferred to family members or other businesses the principals controlled, according to the SEC.

By all indications, the marketplace for all types of private, unregistered securities, including private placements sold to wealthy investors and institutions, is thriving. But what’s growing alongside this legitimate, if risky, market is a seedy side of the financial advice industry. Investment funds promising above-market returns that employ networks of brokers, former brokers, insurance agents or others lurking on the fringes of the industry to sell their investments are taking advantage of unsuspecting investors.

Add in the ability to offer private securities over the internet and solicit clients via social media, and unregistered, private securities being sold to less-than-wealthy investors, many of them senior citizens, are becoming increasingly dangerous. Fraudulent securities are damaging the reputation of the legitimate financial advice industry,​ and the industry itself might serve as the best solution to safeguarding the investing public.

“I’m seeing more of it:​ the spike in the sale of nontraditional investments,” said David Chase, a former SEC staff attorney who’s now in private practice and based in South Florida.

Sales soar

The proliferation of potentially fraudulent schemes comes at a time when the sale of legitimate private securities, which are exempt from having to be registered if they meet certain SEC guidelines, has taken off. While the annual amount of public stock offerings has remained relatively steady over the past decade, the sale of new private stock offerings has soared.

The most popular of these, known as Regulation D offerings, have more than doubled, from 18,295 in 2009 to 37,785 in 2017. Those deals, along with other types of private offerings, raised a total of $3 trillion in 2017.

Brokers and advisers can sell private, unregistered shares to only the wealthiest clients; investors need a net worth of $1 million or an annual individual income of $200,000 to buy in. But the public disclosure is negligible, making the securities opaque, some sources said, and that is hazardous.

The game plan of the fraudulent unregistered securities schemes currently roiling the investment advice market is simple. An investment manager claims to have an alternative investment to the stock market that beats the return on bonds or bank deposits. The investments are heavily marketed with investment seminars, dinners, and ads on radio and in local newspapers.

James Park, securities professor at UCLA, said the internet is giving the promoters one more outlet to sell their fraudulent investments.

“It’s now possible to get investors from everywhere,” he said. “In the old days, brokers would have to call up people to convince them to invest or put on a road show. Now it’s normalized with online platforms.”

In one of the largest recent cases,​ the SEC said the owners of Woodbridge Securities raised $1.2 billion over a five-year period by claiming they were selling loans to real estate developers.Source: North American Securities Administrators Association

Promising returns of 10%, the scheme reeled in 8,400 investors, many of them senior citizens, with the help of a network made up mostly of insurance agents and former stock brokers, according to the regulator. Woodbridge’s owners kept the scam going, the SEC said, by using money from new investors to pay off old investors — a classic Ponzi scheme.

Without admitting or denying the allegations, Woodbridge and its former CEO Robert Shapiro settled with the SEC for $1 billion in disgorgement and fines. Ryan O’Quinn, a lawyer for Mr. Shapiro, did not return a call seeking comment.

Beyond FINRA’s reach

One of the reasons these cons take time to detect is because the agents selling them mostly work outside the supervision of licensed broker-dealers, who are under the purview of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. This gives the fraud ample time to flower before the SEC or a state regulator gets a complaint from an investor, investigates and shuts it down.

The largest Ponzi schemes in general are those that have tapped into a very successful and productive line of independent sales agents who typically have long-standing relationships with clients,” Mr. Chase said. “They sell the deal, and clients get defrauded.”

The SEC did a better job of shutting down what it said was a fraud in the case of Castleberry Financial Services Group after only a year in business. In February, the SEC was granted a temporary restraining order and temporary asset freeze against Castleberry and its principals.

​ Among other allegations, the SEC said the firm’s president, T. Jonathon Turner, formerly known as Jon Barri Brothers, had falsely claimed to have had extensive finance industry experience, an MBA degree and a law degree, while concealing that he had served 18 years in prison for multiple fraud, theft and forgery felonies.

Attorneys for Castleberry Financial and its executives did not return calls seeking comment.

State enforcement

In 2017, state regulators reported that enforcement actions against unregistered brokers and salespeople increased at a faster pace than actions taken against registered individuals. That means the risk from salespeople on the fringes of the financial advice industry is growing. And they are the type of people who often sell scams that are being marketed as unregistered securities.

“[The] enforcement survey reflects a large increase in enforcement actions against unregistered individuals and firms,” according to an October 2018 report from the North American Securities Administrators Association. Members of the group reported actions in 2017 against 675 unregistered individuals and firms — an increase of 24% over the prior year — and 647 registered individuals and firms — a 9% increase.

“The surge in cases against unregistered actors reversed a two-year trend in which registered individuals and firms in the securities industry, broker-dealers and investment advisers, had constituted the majority of respondents in state enforcement actions,” according to NASAA.

Perhaps the poster boy for selling phony unregistered securities is Barry Kornfeld, a leading seller of the Woodbridge Ponzi scheme.

The SEC barred Mr. Kornfeld from working as a broker in 2009. Regardless, he continued to sell private securities; he and his wife allegedly solicited investors at seminars and a “conservative retirement and income planning class” they taught at a Florida university, according to an SEC complaint.

From 2014 to 2017, he and his wife received $3.7 million in commissions after selling more than $60 million of the Woodbridge private securities, according to the commission. Mr. Kornfeld reached a settlement in January with the SEC, agreeing to be barred for a second time from the securities industry. Robert Harris, a lawyer for Mr. Kornfeld, did not return a call seeking comment.

Registered reps involved

Unregistered reps aren’t the only ones selling fraudulent securities. Registered reps working at broker-dealers also are involved.

“We’re starting to see more sophisticated means for registered reps within the broker-dealer space to get investors to invest in private securities,” Thomas Drogan, senior vice president at Finra, said in testimony last year about investor fraud before the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee. “The challenge in that space has been reps encouraging their customers, for example, to send money from their brokerage account to their bank account. And once the money gets to the bank account, instructing the customer to then send the money to the individual reps’ outside business activity. This creates a problem. This creates a very big challenge for broker-dealers to conduct surveillance on.”

The practice, known as “selling away,” can be grounds for disciplinary action if the broker-dealer employing the broker has not approved the broker’s actions. Unregistered firms and individual topped the list of disciplinary actions by state securities regulators in 2017.

Advisers at independent broker-dealers are commonly paid 7% commissions when selling private placements, clearly on the high end of a broker’s pay scale.

“What’s driving this?” asked Adam Gana, a plaintiff’s attorney. “It’s commissions, commissions, commissions. Brokers think they can get away with selling whatever they want on the side.”

Even though these dubious private securities are creating havoc for investors and the financial advice industry, regulators may soon change the rules about how private securities transactions are supervised.

Simplify supervision?

Last year, Finra proposed rule changes that are intended to simplify how broker-dealers supervise a hybrid rep’s outside business activity and sale of private securities. The new rule focuses on the rep’s RIA firm and decreases some of the responsibility the broker-dealer has to watch over that separate line of business. It would cut costs for the firm and the broker. But some think these changes could prove dangerous.

William Galvin, secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the most feared regulator in the securities industry, does not care for the Finra rule proposal.

“Finra claims that the proposed rule will strengthen investor protections, but it is not at all clear how investors will be protected by the removal of supervisory oversight,” Mr. Galvin wrote in a comment letter last April about the proposed rule. “The absence of proper oversight of outside business activities will increase the risk of fraud and abuse.”

Can financial advisers and the financial advice industry do anything to contain this problem?

Local investment advisers are often the best cops on the beat for detecting such frauds. Their knowledge often comes from clients who are being pitched such deals at “free” steak dinners that are provided to get them in the door for a presentation.

Advisers have the responsibility to report a suspicious private securities deal to their firm, said Mr. Chase, the former SEC attorney.

“If brokers get wind of these types of deals, they’ve got to go to the broker-dealer’s compliance department and report to the SEC or Finra,” he said. “They have the ability and obligation to report. There’s nothing wrong with putting these suspicious deals in front of regulators.”

More Legal Trouble for Zane Jeppeson

This is actually the third post I have written about a guy named Zane Jeppeson of Garland, Utah. My prior posts can be found here and here. Today’s update comes to us courtesy of The Leader out of Tremonton, Utah. Apparently Mr. Jeppeson is having a hard time getting his restitution paid and may go back to jail. Kudos to Judge Royal Hansen for keeping his feet to the fire.

Jeppesen granted more time to pay restitution

By Cari Doutre Leader County Editor Feb 13, 2019

Garland resident Zane Jeppesen has been given more time by a judge to pay restitution to victims in the amount of $488,830, extending his time to March 14, 2019. Jeppesen appeared before Third District Court Judge Royal Hansen on Thursday, Feb. 7, 2019, for an evidentiary hearing on one count of pattern of unlawful activity, a second degree felony.

On April 4, 2016, Jeppesen was charged with 11 counts of securities fraud, two counts of theft and one count of pattern of unlawful activity, all second-degree felonies. On July 7, 2017, Jeppesen entered into a plea deal with the state and plead guilty to one count of pattern of unlawful activity and the remaining charges were dismissed.

On Dec. 8, 2017, Jeppesen was sentenced to one to 15 years in the Utah State Prison but the term was suspended. Instead, he was sentenced to 30 days in jail, which he served. Jeppesen was also ordered by the judge to pay restitution to the investors in the previously mentioned cases in the amount of $488,830 within six months of his release, which would have been June 2018.

Jeppesen failed to make a court appearance on Sept. 28, 2018, an order to show cause. On Oct. 1, 2018, on an outstanding bench warrant issued by Third District Court in Salt Lake City. Jeppesen arrested and taken into custody in Box Elder County but was released later that day on a $25,000 cash only bail.

According to a probable cause document, from 2010 to 2014 Jeppesen raised approximately $555,000 from at least four investors and issued promissory notes to those investors. Jeppesen sold promissory notes on land in Saratoga Springs and Payson with the promise that the land was worth value and offered a promissory note and trust deed as security for the real estate development.

Court documents show that Jeppesen failed to tell these investors that he filed for bankruptcy in 2005 and was unable to pay back prior investors. The money from investors was spent on “Ponzi like payments to other investors” as well as transfers to family members, credit card payments, transfers to other bank accounts, electronic stores and bank fees.

The probable cause statement added that Jeppesen has never held a securities license and that Jeppesen’s company, Jeppesen Land and Property, has never been licensed or registered with the Utah Division of Securities.

Documents state that Jeppesen, in connection with the offer of sale of security, directly or indirectly, and made untrue statements or omitted facts in an act, practice or course of business which operated or would operate as fraud or deceit in violation of Utah state laws. The theft charges stem from Jeppesen’s allegedly obtaining or exercised unauthorized control over the property of another with a purpose to deprive them thereof.

This isn’t the first time Jeppesen has been charged with securities fraud. According to court documents Jeppesen was employed through Beverly Hills Development Corporation, a real estate development enterprise ran by Michael J. Fitzgerald of Utah County, from April 1998 to May 2004. In that time Jeppesen obtained a total of 134 Utah investors, many in Box Elder County, and raised approximately $8 million for Beverly Hills Development. During that time he was paid $986,563 in compensation from the company for his work raising investment funds.

There were at least 100 investors from Box Elder County, many of which from Tremonton and Garland that invested with Jeppesen before 2005. Investments ranged from as little as $380 to as much as $467,000.

In June 2018, the Utah Division of Securities of the Department of Commerce filed three different reports against Jeppesen, a Stipulation and Consent Order, an Order of Adjudication and a Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order, all highlighting Jeppesen’s pattern of securities fraud from six different investors starting in 2010 while adding two other incidents that left many Box Elder County residents out of millions of dollars.

According to these documents, the Division determined that Jeppesen, with Jeppesen Land and Properties, are subject to a $300,000 fine. In the stipulation and consent order, it states that JLP is a business entity that was incorporated in Feb. 2011, and is currently an active entity registered with the Utah Division of Corporations with LaDene M. Jeppesen, 92, (Jeppesen’s mother), listed as the registered agent and manager. Jeppesen Land and Properties has never been registered with the Division as an issuer of securities and found no records showing securities registration, exemption from registration or notice filing in any manner for JLP, according to these documents.

If he fails to make the payments to investors he may be sentenced to addition time in jail and/or prison. It has not been stated in court records if Jeppesen has made any restitution to victims.

Top Ten Ways To Avoid Losing Money In A Financial Scam*

130911175808-financial-scam-620xaEvery week Utah residents lose money by investing with friends, family or neighbors – people they knew and trusted. Investment fraud is a big problem here in Utah, largely because our close-knit communities are a prime target for “affinity fraud.”  Our state has a long history of financial scams and Ponzi schemes, many of which have been perpetrated by members of the LDS church on members of their ward or stake.  It’s heartbreaking.

I have seen people who borrowed money against their homes or liquidated retirement accounts in order to fund risky investments based on pitch by someone they trusted.  Unfortunately by the time they call me, the money is long gone – and so is the person who took the money. Because I specialize in helping people recover losses in investment fraud cases I often get asked for advice on how to avoid needing me.  So, at the risk of all my work drying up, here is my TOP TEN ways to avoid investing in a financial scam:

10. Slow down.  According to the Insider Monkey blog, many people invest after only hearing the pitch; watch out for promoters who try to commit you on the spot.  Don’t do it!  Take your time, do your research, ask lots of questions, search the internet, review their financials, visit the company, kick the tires before you buy.  Be very wary of aggressive sales pitches and deadlines.  Ask the hard questions before you hand over your money, not after.

9.  Do your homework.  Run a simple Google search on the company and its managers, or the individual.  If it involves a company, ask for a private placement memorandum and company financials.  Hire an attorney to evaluate the investment and help you perform due diligence.  Attorneys have access to court databases to look for lawsuits and bankruptcies.  Contact federal and state securities regulators see if actions have previously been taken against the company or individuals involved.

8. Hire an attorney.  Attorneys can be expensive, but it is much cheaper to hire an attorney to document the transaction properly on the front end than to sue the bad guys when it all blows up.  A good lawyer can help you perform due diligence on the company and individuals, and can determine whether the investment is properly structured as a private offering and complies with state and federal statutes.  Your lawyer can review the offering materials and help you understand what the risks are.  Hiring a good attorney up front is an investment in your investment.

7.  Get it in writing.  I am amazed how often people will give hundreds of thousands of dollars to someone on nothing more than a handshake.  Don’t do it!  If things go bad later, proper documentation will be critical to me in my efforts to get your money back.  The terms of your deal should always be put in writing, and those terms should be reviewed by the competent attorney you hired.  (See number 8.) In any private investment opportunity you should receive a detailed lengthy disclosure document called a private placement memorandum (PPM).  Take the time to review it before you invest.  It contains detailed information about all aspects of the business including the business model, financial history, risk factors, biographical information on the managers, civil lawsuits, and the terms and conditions of the investment, among other things.  If the company soliciting your money has not prepared a PPM, that should be the end of your discussions with them.

6.  Beware of guarantees.  If anyone tells you that your investment is “guaranteed” that should cause some you concern.  All investments carry risk, and personal guarantees (especially oral ones) are rarely a means to get your money back. Even if you are approached to loan money and get a promissory note that is usually still considered to be an investment, and such loans can be very risky if not properly secured.  If you are told that the loan or investment is “secured” hire an attorney to document the security interest and verify the collateral.  (See Number 8.)

5.  Beware of secret trading strategies, offshore investments, commodity or currency (FOREX) trading, futures, options and minerals.  This could be an article all by itself.  Generally, avoid anyone who credits a highly complex or secretive investing technique or touts unusual success.  Legitimate professionals should be able to explain clearly what they are doing and how they make money.  And if the individual is really making as much money with their strategy as they say they are, they shouldn’t need yours.  These types of “alternative” investments nearly always involve extremely high risk, despite what you are told.

4.  Work through licensed stock brokers or investment advisors.  Even when investing in a private (unregistered) opportunity ask whether the promoter is licensed to sell you the investment, which regulator issued that license and whether the license has ever been revoked or suspended.  A legitimate securities salesperson must be properly licensed under most circumstances.  If you have any questions contact the Utah Division of Securities at (801) 530-6600.

3.  Don’t invest with friends and neighbors.  It may seem like doing business with someone you know and trust would be safer, but that is simply not true.  All investing involves risk, and just because you trust the individual soliciting the investment does not mean that the investment itself is good.  Trust but verify; and if things go badly do not hesitate to aggressively protect your interests.

2.  Keep church out of investing.  If someone pitching you an investment casually mentions that they used to be the bishop or in some other church position, watch out!  Church callings and temple worthiness are not relevant to investment decisions, so beware of those who bring these issues up in an investment pitch.

1.  If it sounds too good to be true it probably is.  If you are thinking about putting money into an alternative, unregistered, or unregulated investment that promises abnormally high returns, watch out.  The fact that others may have been getting their promised returns does not mean you will.  All Ponzi Schemes eventually implode, and you may be left holding the bag.

Note:  I wrote this article for The Enterprise  and it was published in their July 2014 issue.  Because their content is only available to subscribers I am posting it here.

Copyright 2014 by Mark W. Pugsley.  All rights reserved.


*This article is intended to address private investments, not those made through a licensed stock broker or registered investment advisor.

The Falls Event Centers; A Financial Scam Targeting Medical Professionals

Editor’s Note: This is an excerpt from a guest post that I wrote for The White Coat Investor, a fantastic website that provides financial tips and education to medical professionals.  

I have represented a number of doctors and dentists over the years in disputes with their stockbrokers and in Ponzi schemes and investment fraud cases.

My medical professional clients are typically intelligent and savvy with respect to managing their money, but because they are often too busy to dig into the details they can often be taken advantage of by unscrupulous investment advisors, and in some cases, they fall victim to fraud.
Below are a couple of war stories.  Of course, most investment professionals are good and well-qualified – but not all of them.  A keen intellect cannot substitute for taking the time to read the documents carefully.  The devil may really be in the details

The Falls Event Centers

Utah-based entrepreneur Steve Down had been pitching investments in The Falls Event Centers since 2011.  He raised approximately $120 million from more than 300 investors – the majority of whom are dentists throughout the United States.

On May 11, 2018 Down and his event centers were sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission for defrauding investors.

So why did so many dentists fall for this scheme?  How did he do it?
Steve Down is a gregarious 61-year-old promoter who billed himself as an “an innovative entrepreneur and successful business owner, is passionate about creating companies and providing jobs.”

One of Mr. Down’s companies was called CE Select, a continuing education provider for dentists.  According to the detailed complaint filed by the SEC, dentists attending CE Select seminars were pitched an investment in The Falls during their lunch break.

I honestly cannot figure out how he managed to make a pitch for a wedding reception center investment seem like a normal part of a dental continuing education seminar.  But I digress.

The investment was basically a hard-money loan to fund the purchase and construction of more event centers and was supposed to pay returns of 10 to 14% per year to investors.

Down’s investment pitch remained essentially the same for years. The SEC alleged that Down made the following representations to his captive audience of unsuspecting dentists:

  • The Falls had 8 profitable locations and was growing at a rapid pace,
  • The Falls would have 200 event centers by 2022
  • After The Falls had 12 centers, it would be able to obtain institutional loans to replace the hard money loans,
  • Many of the event centers were profitable even before they opened, because they were accepting event bookings before they opened, and continued to be profitable after they opened,
  • Each event center would earn gross revenues of $1 million per year and cover expenses of approximately $650,000, leaving a profit of approximately $350,000, or 35% of revenue, per year.
  • The 200 projected centers would bring in net income of $70 million per year.
  • The Falls would be worth $2.8 billion by the time it had 200 centers in 2022.

The problem, according to the SEC, is that many of these representations were false, and Down allegedly knew it.

The Falls’ own accounting records showed that the event centers had never been profitable.  Down also allegedly knew that his business model was unsustainable because of crippling debts owed to investors and mortgage holders.  But he nevertheless kept on pitching this “profitable” investment to dentists and other investors until the SEC finally shut him down.

Down did not admit or deny the allegations in the SEC’s complaint, but he and The Falls did consent to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining them from future violations of securities laws and Down paid a civil penalty of $150,000.  A final judgment was entered against Down and The Falls on May 11, 2018, by United States District Court Judge Jill Parrish.
Despite all this, according to an article in the local paper, Down planned to continue building his wedding center empire, and “The Falls will continue to conduct business as usual.”

But that won’t happen – The Falls filed for bankruptcy soon thereafter.

What do you think? Have you been a victim of investment fraud? Why do you think doctors often fall prey to fraudulent investments? Comment below!

Rust Rare Coin: An Analysis of Utah’s Latest Massive Ponzi Scheme

Imagine waking up one day and discovering that all of your retirement savings were gone; all the money you had been working to save had evaporated in a poof.

That’s what happened to over 200 people on November 15th.  They had invested in a “Silver Pool” investment promoted by Gaylen Rust who claimed he had inside information about the silver market and told investors he was consistently making returns of 25 to 40% per year.  He claimed that investor money would be used to purchase and store silver bars, and that he had never lost money in his trading.

Photo by Chris Detrick | The Salt Lake Tribune

People bought into this Silver Pool investment and recommended it to their family and friends.  And after watching their investment increase (on paper) many “doubled down” and put all of their retirement money with him.

After all, Rust was an active, respected member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and a generous promoter of music education in the schools.  What could go wrong?

Well, as it turns out plenty.

On November 13, 2018 the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Utah Division of Securities jointly filed a lawsuit against Gaylen Rust and his company Rust Rare Coin, Inc.  The SEC filed a similar lawsuit a few days later.  The filing of simultaneous, obviously coordinated lawsuits by three different securities regulators is quite rare in this state, and is indicative of the size and seriousness of the case.

The state and federal regulators have alleged that Gaylen Rust has been “engaged in a massive scheme to defraud” and has been running a Ponzi scheme since 2008.  He raised over $200 million from investors in the last 5 years alone, and now it’s gone.

If true, this will be one of the largest Ponzi schemes in Utah history.

I have been getting calls from investors, regulators and former Rust employees over the last few weeks and almost all of them are stunned by this news.  Gaylen Rust and his father Alvin have maintained a good reputation in the rare coin and precious metals industry in Utah for many years.  Alvin Rust was an avid coin collector and started Rust Rare Coin in 1966 as a way to combine his hobby with his livelihood.  Rust Rare Coin was known as a reputable place to purchase gold and silver coins, even after Alvin got caught up in some ill-fated deals with Mark Hoffman years ago.

According to the allegations in the CFTC Complaint, Rust and his company began promoting a “Silver Pool” in 2008 as a way for people to invest in the silver market, which Rust probably seemed to understand quite well:

“[Rust] told investors and prospective investors that they would sell silver held in the pool as market prices rose and buy silver for the pool as market prices fell; thereby increasing the amount of silver held in the Silver Pool, as well as the value of each investor’s share in that pool.  [Rust] told investors and prospective investors in the Silver Pool that by trading silver in this manner, they generated extraordinarily high returns, averaging twenty to twenty-five percent per year and sometimes as high as forty percent per year or more.”

Consistent returns of 25% to 40% per year??  A simple Google search would have shown that trading commodities is extremely risky.  How did he achieve such consistent profitability? The simple answer is that he didn’t.   Potential investors should have been skeptical of those consistently high returns, but most trusted him and did not attempt to verify the claims Gaylen Rust was making.  My opinion is that if any investment claims to achieve returns of 15% or more per year you should be extremely careful.

Shockingly, Rust didn’t provide investors with any paperwork setting forth the terms of the investment, he didn’t formally disclose his financials, and he didn’t provide any risk disclosures.  All of those should have been huge red flags to any investor.

Once he had their money, Rust sent out “account statements” via email showing impressive (but unfortunately fake) returns on their investments. Rust purportedly claimed that he had as much as $80 million dollars of silver bars stored at Brink’s depositories in Salt Lake City and Los Angeles, and that this reserves would permit investors to liquidate their investments at any time.

How much silver is that?  One source told me that $80 million in silver would fill five semi-trucks.  That’s a lot of silver, but unfortunately Brinks depositories aren’t big enough to hold that much silver. Not good.

According to the CFTC complaint, Rust did not use investor money to purchase silver or silver contracts for the Silver Pool as he had represented.  Instead, investor’s retirement money went to make payments to other investors, to fund other affiliated Rust Companies, and to pay personal expenses for the Rust family.

Rust never even had a commodities trading account at HSBC Bank, and was never licensed as a broker or commodities trader.

It was all a big scam.

The Prospects for Recovery

One of the first questions I invariably get from victims in a case such as this is: “What are the chances of recovering of my retirement losses?”

Unfortunately, they are not great in this case, as in most Ponzi scheme cases.  It is exceedingly rare to recover all of your losses from a Ponzi scheme.

The CFTC case (which is the main case) has been assigned to United States District Judge Tena Campbell who is a highly respected jurist here in Utah.  Based on the CFTC’s motion Judge Campbell has selected Jonathan Hafen to serve as the receiver in this case and he will work under the direction of the Court along with several lawyers in his firm, including Joe Covey who will be lead litigation counsel.

Because I am not involved in that aspect of the case and only have access to the public filings I cannot predict how much money will ultimately be recovered. Mr. Hafen has stated in open court that there are no significant assets to recover, which is not a good sign.

Mr. Hafen’s job will be to gather assets from any sources he can, and then to distribute those assets in an equitable manner to the victims.  You can learn more about how an SEC receivership works here.  The latest filings and information about the case can be found on the Receiver’s website: https://rustrarecoinreceiver.com/.

Unfortunately, one of his primary tasks will be to file clawback lawsuits against investors who got their money out before the whole scheme collapsed.  So if you are one of the lucky investors who got out you should expect a demand letter from the receiver within a year. It’s a good idea to hire an attorney to handle that clawback case; preferably one who understands the process.

Complex receiverships such as this are extremely expensive and can stay open for years, depending on how long to takes to pull together and then distribute all of the assets. The Vescor case involving Val Southwick took ten years to complete, which led understandable criticism of the receivership process.

The only winners in this process are the lawyers.

How To Avoid Getting Scammed

This is a tragic story that is repeated over and over in our state, and most of these scams take advantage (intentionally or not) of the relationships of trust that members of the LDS Church have with one another.  This is commonly called “affinity fraud.”  Our state has a long history of financial scams and Ponzi schemes, many of which have been perpetrated by members of the LDS church on members of their ward or stake.  It’s heartbreaking to say, but Utah has one of the highest rates of fraud per capita of any state in the country.

I specialize in helping people recover losses from investment fraud, but by the time people call me the money is usually long gone – and so is the person who took the money.  So here are a few tips to avoid getting sucked into an investment scam:

  1. Slow down. Take your time, do your research, ask lots of questions, search the internet, review their financials, visit the company, kick the tires before you buy.  Be very wary of aggressive sales pitches and deadlines.  Ask the hard questions before you hand over your money, not after.
  2. Do your homework. Run a simple Google search on the company and its managers, or the individual.  If it involves a company, ask for a private placement memorandum and company financials.  Contact federal and state securities regulators see if actions have previously been taken against the company or individuals involved.  The local office of the SEC can be reached at 801-524-5796, or you can call the Utah Division of Securities at (801) 530-6600.
  3. Hire an attorney. Attorneys can be expensive, but it is much cheaper to hire an attorney to document the transaction properly on the front end than to sue the bad guys when it all blows up.  A good lawyer can help you perform due diligence on the company and individuals, and can determine whether the investment is properly structured as a private offering and complies with state and federal statutes.
  4. Get it in writing. I am amazed how often people will give hundreds of thousands of dollars to someone on nothing more than a handshake.  The terms of your deal should always be put in writing, and those terms should be reviewed by the competent attorney you hired.
  5. Beware of guarantees. If anyone tells you that your investment is “guaranteed” that should be a red flag.  All investments carry risk, and personal guarantees (especially oral ones) are rarely a means to get your money back.
  6. Beware of secret trading strategies, offshore investments, commodity or currency (FOREX) trading, futures, options and minerals. Avoid investing with anyone who claims to have a secretive investing algorithm or touts unusual success.  These types of investments nearly always involve extremely high risk, despite what you may be told.
  7. Work through licensed stock brokers or investment advisors. Even when investing in a private (unregistered) opportunity ask whether the promoter is licensed to sell securities, which is required under most circumstances.  Run their name through FINRA’s Broker Check
  8. Don’t invest with friends and neighbors. It may seem like doing business with someone you know and trust would be safer, but that is simply not true.  All investing involves risk, and just because you trust the individual soliciting the investment does not mean that the investment itself is good.  Trust but verify; and if things go badly do not hesitate to aggressively protect your interests.
  9. Keep church out of it. If someone pitching you an investment casually mentions that they used to be the bishop or in some other church position, watch out!  Church activity or high callings are not relevant to investment decisions, and if anyone mentions their church position as part of an investment pitch warning bells should be going off.
  10. If it sounds too good to be true it probably is. If you are thinking about putting money into an alternative, unregistered, or unregulated investment that promises abnormally high returns, watch out.

Copyright © 2018 by Mark W. Pugsley.  All rights reserved.

Another Former LDS Stake President Indicted for Affinity Fraud

On Wednesday September 6, 2018 the US Department of Justice announced the indictment of Robert G. Mouritsen of Kaysville, Utah on three counts of wire fraud and three counts of money laundering.

The DOJ alleged that Mouritsen used a “position of prominence” to induce friends and fellow church members to give him money to further a fraud scheme he called “The Project” which targeted his fellow church members and was ongoing at the time the Indictment was filed.  Luckily he only managed to raise $1.5 million before the feds shut him down.

The “position of prominence” the DOJ is referring to is the fact that Mouritsen was a stake president of the Kaysville Utah Crestwood Stake of the Mormon Church from 1989 to 1997.   He also wrote a book called “Mantle: Windy Day in August, at Nauvoo, When the Mantle of the Prophet Joseph Smith Fell on Brigham Young Hardcover” (available on Amazon!).

Kaysville, Utah is predominantly LDS community 20 miles north of Salt Lake City.  He allegedly began the scheme just a few years after he was released as the stake president.

Mouritsen told prospective investors that The Project “involved a series of complicated international transactions” that “involved governments in Asia and Europe and required the help of attorneys and bankers.”  He also purportedly told investors that this investment opportunity had to be kept “strictly confidential” so he could not disclose many of the details.  Right.

And of course he promised that the investment would produce very high returns.  Secrecy, unusually high returns and urgency are all significant red flags that should have caused investors to forego this investment opportunity, but unfortunately some folks fell for it.  If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Predictably, Mouritsen neglected to tell investors that The Project had failed to produce any returns in over a decade and that he used a significant portion of investor money for his own personal use and benefit.

Affinity Fraud in Utah

Affinity fraud is particularly prevalent among members of the LDS Church.  The primary reason for this, in my opinion, is because church members tend to have a high level of trust in fellow church members, and that invites unscrupulous people to take advantage of that trust.

The thought process is that since Brother So-and-so is/was a bishop, stake president, elders quorum president, etc., he was called by revelation and therefore is a worthy priesthood holder in the eyes of God.  Sure, the investment sounds too good to be true, but since he was a great church leader it must be legit!  In Utah affinity fraud schemes are nearly always targeted at people who are in same ward or stake – a place where his current or former church service is well-known.

I have written about affinity fraud schemes targeting members of the Mormon Church for years, including here, here, here, here and here (among others).

This is a big problem in our community and I have repeatedly called on leaders of the LDS Church to be more proactive in warning church members that they need to carefully evaluate investment opportunities on their merits, regardless of who is pitching them.

How To Avoid Affinity Fraud

Investing always involves some degree of risk, but investors can mitigate these risks by carefully investigating investment opportunities. The Securities and Exchange Commission recommends the following steps to avoid getting caught up in an affinity fraud scheme:

  • Check out everything – no matter how trustworthy the person seems who brings the investment opportunity to your attention. Never make an investment based solely on the recommendation of a member of an organization or religious or ethnic group to which you belong. Investigate the investment thoroughly and check the truth of every statement you are told about the investment. Be aware that the person telling you about the investment may have been fooled into believing that the investment is legitimate when it is not.
  • Do not fall for investments that promise spectacular profits or “guaranteed” returns. If an investment seems too good to be true, then it probably is. Similarly, be extremely leery of any investment that is said to have no risks; very few investments are risk-free. The greater the potential return from an investment, the greater your risk of losing money. Promises of fast and high profits, with little or no risk, are classic warning signs of fraud.
  • Be skeptical of any investment opportunity that is not in writing. Fraudsters often avoid putting things in writing, but legitimate investments are usually in writing. Avoid an investment if you are told they do “not have the time to reduce to writing” the particulars about the investment. You should also be suspicious if you are told to keep the investment opportunity confidential.
  • Don’t be pressured or rushed into buying an investment before you have a chance to think about – or investigate – the “opportunity.” Just because someone you know made money, or claims to have made money, doesn’t mean you will, too. Be especially skeptical of investments that are pitched as “once-in-a-lifetime” opportunities, particularly when the promoter bases the recommendation on “inside” or confidential information.
  • Fraudsters are increasingly using the Internet to target particular groups through e-mail spams. If you receive an unsolicited e-mail from someone you don’t know, containing a “can’t miss” investment, your best move is to pass up the “opportunity” and forward the spam to the SEC at enforcement@sec.gov.

If you are a victim of this scam or know more details about Mr. Mouritsen please feel free to share your story in the comments below.  Anonymous comments are welcomed.

Copyright © 2018 by Mark Pugsley.  All rights reserved.

More Trouble for John Zane Jeppesen of Garland, Utah

I have previously  written about Mr. Jeppeson, now his is more trouble.  This is from the Ogden Herald Journal this week:

The Utah Division of Securities of the Department of Commerce have filed court documents against John Zane Jeppesen, of Garland, bringing forth more accusations and details into Jeppesen’s nearly 20 year behavior of securities fraud and outlining a series of investments that have totaled nearly $9 million while naming family members of Jeppesen’s as recipients of those investment funds.

The Utah Division of Securities recently filed three different reports against Jeppesen: a Stipulation and Consent Order, an Order of Adjudication and a Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order, all highlighting Jeppesen’s pattern of securities fraud from six different investors starting in 2010 while adding two other incidents that left many Box Elder County residents out of millions of dollars.

According to these documents, the Division determined that Jeppesen, with Jeppesen Land and Properties, are subject to a $300,000 fine. In the stipulation and consent order, it states that JLP is a business entity that was incorporated in Feb. 2011, and is currently an active entity registered with the Utah Division of Corporations with LaDene M. Jeppesen, 92, (Jeppesen’s mother), listed as the registered agent and manager. Jeppesen Land and Properties has never been registered with the Division as an issuer of securities and found no records showing securities registration, exemption from registration or notice filing in any manner for JLP, according to these documents.

Breaking down the timeline of Jeppesen’s fraudulent investment behavior, the Division outlined three separate time frames that go back as far as 1999.

According to these documents, in 1999 Jeppesen acknowledged in an Idaho order that he was not licensed to sell securities under Idaho code but violated that code by selling securities that were unregistered. He also violated Idaho code by making untrue statements of material facts, and omitted facts to investors by failing to disclose to them that the promissory notes he was selling were not registered as securities and that he did not have a license to sell securities.

Jeppesen took this pattern of unlawful activity to Utah and in 2005 entered into a similar order with Utah and the Division for similar charges. In this series of events, court documents state, “Jeppesen deceived 134 Utah investors and raised approximate $8 million. For his unlawful services, Jeppesen received a total of $986,563 in compensation.” Many of those Utah investors were Box Elder County residents.

In a 2007 Utah order, Jeppesen was told he “would not engage in the sale of unregistered securities in the state of Utah” and that he would become a licensed broker dealer, investment adviser of agent before the Division before engaging in any securities transactions. Jeppesen was also told he was prohibited from making any untrue statements or omitting facts and that he would tell potential investors the existence of his current stipulation.

In 2010, Jeppesen violated the securities laws in a third round of securities violations. In this round of violations, according to court documents, Jeppesen worked with six investors in both Utah and Idaho.

Investors 1 and 2 are residents of Idaho with family and business ties to Utah. They met Jeppesen through a family member that previously invested with him in a different venture. Jeppesen collected $100,000 from these investors (over the course of a year), returned approximately $25,770, promising a 12 percent return on property located in Utah County.

According to the Stipulation and Consent Order, Jeppesen “used these funds in a manner inconsistent with what he told Investor 1 and Investor 2,” and instead used $5,225 towards banks and credit cards, $18,720 for payments to earlier investors, $530 to LaDene Jeppesen and $2,500 to his wife, Robyn Jeppesen. According to this document, Jeppesen told these investors “there was no way to lose money on this deal.”

Investors 3 and 4, a married couple from Salt Lake County, also met Jeppesen through a family member that invested with him previously. This couple invested five different times with Jeppesen for a total of $135,000 and are still owed the full amount in principal alone.

The document states that Jeppesen did not provide these investors with a promissory note or trust deed at the time of investment and when asked, Jeppesen claimed, “he forgot to record the trust deed and create a note.” These investors were told that they would be paid back within one year.

In this case, Jeppesen told investors, “There was no need for a promissory note or trust deed because it is a short-term investment and they have to move fast.” Instead, the Division stated, Jeppesen used these funds in a manner inconsistent with what he told these investors with payments to earlier investors of $24,130, a payment of $4,357 to banks and credit cards and over $4,000 to various businesses.

The Division also states that Jeppesen used those funds paying Robyn Jeppesen $11,532, Shannon Fitzgerald (wife of Michael Fitzgerald) $10,336, $5,000 to Lone Peak Real Estate and $2,200 in payments to earlier investors.

Investor 5 is a resident of Davis County and was told by Jeppesen that “he could not wait for a bank loan” and that his investment would be a trust deed. Jeppesen also told Investor 5 that “he was working with Mike Fitzgerald, his business partner on several land deals” and that Fitzgerald was “a genius with land deals.” Investor 5 was told that Jeppesen and Fitzgerald wouldn’t need 45 days to return his funds because they had property in Beverly Hills, California that was under contract that would sell within 30 days.

Investor 5 was also told that he could foreclose on the property if Jeppesen or Fitzgerald didn’t return his funds in 45 days. This investor wired $100,000 to JLP in Feb. 2012. One month later Jeppesen told Investor 5 that he would not be able to return the funds within the promised 45 days because “of an issue with the closing on the Beverly Hills property.”

Jeppesen offered Investor 5 an extra 1 percent interest on top of the guaranteed 20 percent if Investor 5 agreed to keep his funds with Jeppesen and not foreclose on the property but the investor declined the offer.

To this date, Investor 5 is still owed $100,000 in principal alone and that the investment monies were used by Jeppesen in a manner inconsistent with what the investor was told.

Instead, the funds were used to make payments to earlier investors in the amount of $53,556, $16,571 to a credit card, $11,113 to Robyn Jeppesen, $6,500 to Shannon Fitzgerald, $5,425 to Carole Jeppesen (Jeppesen’s sister in law), $2,625 transferred to other bank accounts, $1,665 to Best Buy, $1,500 transferred to himself, $530 transferred to LaDene Jeppesen and other transactions all totaling $100,000.

According to documents, Jeppesen used Investor 6’s funds in a manner inconsistent with what Jeppesen told him including, $79,045 in payments to earlier investors, $49,881 in credit card payments, $22,475 to Robyn Jeppesen, $19,841 to Shannon Fitzgerald, $12,711 in transfers to other bank accounts, $21,465 to Utah County Treasurer, $5,447 for remodeling, $2,650 to LaDene Jeppesen, $4,969 in unknown expenses and various other transactions totaling $220,000.

During Jeppesen’s May 24, 2018, hearing, he presented two arguments. “First, Jeppesen asserted that he thought that he had not violated the securities laws this third time because he had obtained a business license for his new enterprise and because he had secured the investment of the investors by security interests in real property. Secondly, he asserted that his investors would not be harmed because the value of the properties involved in the investment exceeded the total amount owed to the investors, documents state.

Although the first argument is unrelated to the fine imposed on Jeppesen, the Division states that he did not consult with a knowledgeable securities attorney to assure that the investments weren’t in violation of securities laws. Instead, Jeppesen said he “relied on the advice of two non-attorneys, one of whom was a Mr. Fitzgerald who had been Jeppesen’s accomplice in the $8 million securities fraud transaction that was the subject of the 2007 Utah Order,” documents state.

“Jeppesen’s testimony that he was now complying with securities laws, or thought that he was complying with securities laws, is inherently and clearly not to be believed,” court documents state. The Division added that there was no documented credible evidence produced at that hearing that said investors had security interest in real property.

Countering Jeppesen’s claim that his investors weren’t harmed in a substantial way, “First and foremost, is the fact that the parties acknowledge and agree that the investors in the present third round of securities fraud are currently owed $488,830 in principal alone. These investors are currently harmed in a substantial way,” the document states.

Jeppesen also stated during that hearing that “the properties that could be sold to make payment to the investors were not presently owned by him or the Respondent entity, but by the Jeppesen family members,” it added. He added that one of the properties had already been sold but the sales proceeds from the transaction were “tied up in escrow” and subject to multiple claims.

“No credible evidence was given that even one dollar of the present or prospective sales proceeds from these properties would ever pass into the hands of the harmed investors,” the document stated.

The Division added that Jeppesen provided no cooperation to their investigation and that “the Respondents have transferred to Jeppesen family members the real properties that were meant to respond to, or secure, the investments of the victims of the Respondents.”

On April 4, 2016, Jeppesen was charged in Utah’s Third District Court in Salt Lake City with 11 counts of securities fraud, two counts of theft and one count of pattern of unlawful activity, all second-degree felonies. On July 7, 2017, Jeppesen entered into a plea deal with the state and plead guilty to one count of pattern of unlawful activity and the remaining charges were dismissed.

On Dec. 8, 2017, Jeppesen was sentenced to one to 15 years in the Utah State Prison but the term was suspended. Instead, he was sentenced to 30 days in jail, which he served. Jeppesen was also ordered by the judge to pay restitution to the investors in the previously mentioned cases in the amount of $488,830. If he fails to make the payments to investors he may be sentenced to addition time in jail and/or prison.