The MFWire
Manage Email Alerts | Sponsorships | About MFWire | Who We Are

Subscribe to MFWire.com's News Alerts [click]

Rating:WSJ: Time for Restitution Not Rated 0.0 Email Routing List Email & Route  Print Print
Friday, September 08, 2006

WSJ: Time for Restitution

by: Sean Hanna, Editor in Chief

Maybe the fund scandals really are entering the final stretch. Friday's Wall Street Journal Fund Track column provides some proof in the debate by running a piece on the logistical challenges of reimbursing harmed shareholders. It even states that the "next stage in the saga of the mutual-fund scandal of recent years is about to begin." If anyone knows the mind of Eliot Spitzer, it is the folks at the WSJ; they do, afterall, seem to have an inside pipeline to Spitzer's office.

This "second stage" (or is it the third?) involves the disbursement of some $2 billion in fines that the regulators have so far collected from fund firms that got caught up with market timers and late traders. The problem -- as everyone in the fund industry must know -- is that determining who should get what is a recordkeeping nightmare involving omnibus accounts and retirment plan administrators, as well as the everyday changes in shareholdings.

And considering the small likely payout for most investors the task hardly seems worth the trouble. According to the WSJ, the typical fund shareholder may receive just $10. Meanwhile, some settlement agreements even waive restitution payments of less than $10 since the cost of processing those payments would eat up the entire amount.

That low payout may even anger some shareholders who expected to receive more after seeing their account balance dwindle by as much as 30 percent to 50 percent in some cases. Of course, those losses were the result of the falling stock prices and not improper trading.

The paper notes that so far three significant restitution plans -- PBHG Funds, Columbia Funds and One Funds -- have been put forward for public comment, allowing the paper to take a look at the issues. In those three cases distributions could start by the end of this year.

Some sources told the paper that they are wondering why each fund firm is allowed to use a different formula to determine the restitution payments it will make to shareholders.

"Why are we reinventing the wheel every time there's a new distribution plan?" the paper quotes Sarah Miller, director in government relations at the American Bankers Association, as asking. The ABA also questioned the time frame for making the payments in a letter to the SEC last month. 

Stay ahead of the news ... Sign up for our email alerts now

 Do You Recommend This Story?

Return to Top
 News Archives
2021: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2020: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2019: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2018: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2017: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2016: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2015: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2014: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2013: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2012: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2011: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2010: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2009: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2008: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2007: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2006: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2005: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2004: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2003: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2002: Q4Q3Q2Q1
 Subscribe via RSS:
Add to My Yahoo!
follow us in feedly

©All rights reserved to InvestmentWires, Inc. 1997-2021
14 Wall Street | 20th Floor | New York, NY 10005 | P: 212-331-8968 | F: 212-331-8998
Privacy Policy :: Terms of Use