SEC files lawsuit against former ConvergEx official linked to fraudulent markups

By Staff Writer | Apr 14, 2016 12:29 AM EDT

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a lawsuit against a former ConvergEx executive. The charge details that he's guilty of fraudulently reaping millions of dollars for his onetime employer.

According to Yahoo, ConvergEx former executive Khaled 'Kal' Bassily was accused of running a scheme to regularly charge hidden mark-ups on customers' securities trades. The complaint filed in a federal court in Manhattan indicates the scheme eventually led to getting millions of dollars in the process and has given lots of money to Bassily for his participation in the process. He has routinely misled customers, including charities, religious organizations and their retirement funds about the trading costs.

Reuters reported that Bassily, 50, a graduate of Columbia University also coached traders on the amount of hidden charges, known as trading profits, that they could collect without the customers noticing. The SEC allegedly said that the scheme ran from 2006 to December 2011, spanning a 5-year time. Bassily was the head of the global transition management unit to ConvergEx Execution Solutions LLC before being fired in 2013. After then, the ConvergEx agreed to pay more than $150 million to the Securities and Exchange Commission to end the probing regarding alleged customer overcharges and wrongdoings.

CNBC wrote that the privately held company in Manhattan provided brokerage and trading-related services for institutional investors. Bassily's lawyer, Jim Benjamin, has said that his client "acted in good faith by following ConvergEx's approved business model. He will vigorously defend himself against these charges, and looks forward to his day in court."

Basilly was fired in 2013 for concerns over 'certain communications with clients' and transactions prior to 2012. The SEC seeks to recoup ill-gotten profits, impose civil fines and obtain other relief from Basilly. ConvergEx, which is not a defendant in the case, declined to release a comment regarding their past employee.

More Sections