Commitments and Contingencies |
3 Months Ended |
|---|---|
Mar. 31, 2018 | |
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
| Commitments and Contingencies |
Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation and Regulatory Matters
In December 2014 and January 2015, two purported class action suits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against American Realty Capital Partners, Inc. (“ARCP”), certain affiliated entities and individuals, ARCP’s auditing firm, and the underwriters of ARCP’s May 2014 $1,656,000 common stock offering (“May 2014 Offering”) and three prior note offerings. The complaints have been consolidated. Ladenburg was named as a defendant as one of 17 underwriters of the May 2014 Offering and as one of eight underwriters of ARCP’s July 2013 offering of $300,000 in convertible notes. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the offering materials were misleading based on financial reporting of expenses, improperly-calculated AFFO (adjusted funds from operations), and false and misleading Sarbanes-Oxley certifications, including statements as to ARCP’s internal controls, and that the underwriters are liable for violations of federal securities laws. The plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, as well as other relief. In June 2016, the court denied the underwriters’ motions to dismiss the complaint. In August 2017, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Ladenburg intends to vigorously defend against these claims.
In November 2015, two purported class action complaints were filed in state court in Tennessee against officers and directors of Miller Energy Resources, Inc. (“Miller”), as well as Miller’s auditors and nine firms that underwrote six securities offerings in 2013 and 2014, and raised approximately $151,000. Ladenburg was one of the underwriters of two of the offerings. The complaints allege, among other things, that the offering materials were misleading based on the purportedly overstated valuation of certain assets, and that the underwriters are liable for violations of federal securities laws. The plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, as well as other relief. In December 2015 the defendants removed the complaints to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee; in November 2016, the cases were consolidated. In August 2017, the court granted in part and denied in part the underwriters' motion to dismiss the complaint. Ladenburg intends to vigorously defend against these claims.
In January 2016, an amended complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. and related entities as well as their officers and directors. The amended complaint added Ladenburg and other underwriters of securities offerings in 2013 and 2014 that in the aggregate raised approximately $2,900,000 as defendants to the purported class action. Ladenburg was one of the underwriters of the October 2013 initial public offering. The complaints allege, among other things, that the offering materials were misleading based on representations concerning the maintenance and integrity of the issuer’s pipelines, and that the underwriters are liable for violations of federal securities laws. In April 2018, the court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the second amended complaint with prejudice and entered final judgment for the defendants.
During the period from May 2016 to July 2017, five arbitration claims were filed against Ladenburg by former customers concerning purported unauthorized trading, excessive trading and mishandling of their accounts by a former Ladenburg registered representative, and asserting compensatory damages in excess of $5,400. In July, October and December 2017, settlements were reached resolving four of the claims; the amount paid by Ladenburg in connection with these settlements was not material. The total amount of compensatory damages asserted in connection with the remaining claim is $300. Ladenburg intends to vigorously defend against this claim.
SEC examination reports provided to Triad and Securities America Advisors, Inc. in May and August 2016, respectively, asserted that the firms had acted inconsistently with their fiduciary duties (including the requirement to seek best execution) in recommending and selecting mutual fund share classes that paid 12b-1 fees where lower cost share classes also were available in those same funds. The SEC also asserted that the firms’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and compensation related to the mutual fund share classes that paid 12b-1 fees were insufficient. Triad revised its disclosures and completed restitution to its affected clients in 2016. On April 6, 2018, the SEC issued an order against Securities America Advisors on consent that includes a cease and desist order and imposes remedial sanctions of disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and a fine; the combined total amount is $5,800, which has previously been reserved.
In February 2018 the SEC announced a Share Class Selection Disclosure Initiative (“Initiative”) to encourage registered investment advisory firms to self-report failures to disclose conflicts of interest to clients concerning the selection of mutual fund share classes that paid fees pursuant to Rule 12b-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the period 2014-2016. Under the Initiative, the SEC will require self-reporting firms, among other things, to disgorge to clients the 12b-1 fees received during the relevant period when lower-cost share classes were available. The Company's investment advisory subsidiaries are reviewing their disclosures to clients during the relevant time period and the amounts of Rule 12b-1 fees received to determine whether to self-report under the Initiative by the June 12, 2018 deadline.
In the ordinary course of business, in addition to the above disclosed matters, the Company's subsidiaries are defendants in other litigation, arbitration and regulatory proceedings and may be subject to unasserted claims primarily in connection with their activities as securities broker-dealers or as a result of services provided in connection with securities offerings. Such litigation and claims may involve substantial or indeterminate amounts and are in varying stages of legal proceedings. When the Company believes that it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated (after giving effect to any expected insurance recovery), the Company accrues such amount. Upon final resolution, amounts payable may differ materially from amounts accrued.
The Company had accrued liabilities in the amount of approximately $8,821 at March 31, 2018 and $$6,902 at December 31, 2017 for certain pending matters which are included in accounts payable and accrued liabilities. During the three months ended March 31, 2018 and March 31, 2017, the Company charged $2,572 and $143, respectively, to operations with respect to such matters. For other pending matters, the Company was unable to estimate a range of possible loss; however, in the opinion of management, after consultation with counsel, the ultimate resolution of these matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity.
Operating Leases
At March 31, 2018, the Company was obligated under several non-cancelable lease agreements for office space, which provide for future minimum lease payments aggregating approximately $71,926, through January 2032.
Highland is obligated under a new lease office agreement effective March 1, 2018 providing for payments of $183 through February 28, 2023.
In connection with an office lease entered into in March 2016, Securities America has exercised an option to lease additional office space, which has not yet been constructed, for 12 years and, would require the payment of an estimated average annual rent of $2,000, subject to certain adjustments. The Company currently expects that this lease would commence in 2020 upon completion of the construction. Such estimated rent amounts are included in the total minimum lease payments above.
|