 | David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> |
Anybody notice Mark Carney and David Eby at the top of this old email?
|
| David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 3:41 PM | To:
chairman@sec.gov, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
melanie.joly@ised-isde.gc.ca, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca,
Wayne.Long@parl.gc.ca, Susan.Holt@gnb.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca,
Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca, Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, tonymcquail@gmail.com, news@sec.gov,
don.davies@parl.gc.ca, premier@ontario.ca,
Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Yves-Francois.Blanchet@parl.gc.ca,
dan.albas@parl.gc.ca, bobpozen@mit.edu Cc:
mdcohen212@gmail.com, CommissionerPeirce@sec.gov,
CommissionerUyeda@sec.gov, boston@sec.gov, newyork@sec.gov,
chicago@sec.gov Bcc: myson333@yahoo.com |
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Minister of Finance / Ministre des Finances <minister-ministre@fin.gc.ca>Date: Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 6:44 PM Subject: Automatic reply: YO Christopher Perry here is some of what you did not wish to know To: David Amos < david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
The Department of Finance Canada acknowledges receipt of your electronic correspondence.
Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your comments.
Le ministère des Finances Canada accuse réception de votre courriel.
Nous vous assurons que vos commentaires sont les bienvenus.
Christopher Perry Northern Trust One International Place Suite 1600 Boston MA 02110 617-235-1835
Sunday, 6 July 2025
Where did all the hearings go???
MFS Investment Mangement
Since 1924, MFS Investment Management 1 has guided
investors in the United States through every market condition on record.
Today, our exclusive lineup of Sun Life MFS funds brings Canadian
investors the power of their deep-rooted expertise and three driving
pillars of investment success.
For press inquires, please contact:
Dan Flaherty (Americas), 617-954-4256, DFlaherty@mfs.com
Cherida Naughton (Europe and Asia), 44-207-429-7426, CNaughton@mfs.com
Kasia Gilewska (Europe), 44-207-429-7356, KGilewska@mfs.com
MFS is a majority-owned subsidiary of Sun Life Financial (SLF), based in Toronto.
Further information can be found under Investor Relations at www.sunlife.com.
Robert Almeida, Global Investment Strategist
Erik Weisman, Chief Economist
Benoit Anne, Investment Solutions Group
Others generally available to comment on investment topics and retirement trends.
![Mike W. Roberge]( "Mike W. Roberge")
![Mike W. Roberge]( "Mike W. Roberge")  Michael W. Roberge, CFA, is chair of MFS
Investment Management® (MFS®). He helps set the strategic direction of
the firm. He is the chair of the Chairman's Committee, chair of the MFS
Board of Directors, and a trustee on the MFS mutual funds board.
Michael became chair in 2025 after leading the firm as CEO from 2017 to
2024. In addition, he held the role of chief investment officer from
2010 through 2018. He also previously held the roles of president of MFS
from 2010 through 2017 and co-CEO from 2015 through 2016. In 2006, he
was appointed chief investment officer -- US Investments and co-director
of Global Research. Before that, he was senior vice president and
associate director of Fixed Income Research and served as portfolio
manager for several MFS fixed income funds. He joined the firm in 1996
as a credit analyst in the municipal fixed income group. Before joining
MFS, he was a municipal credit analyst and portfolio manager for the
Colonial Group from 1995 to 1996 and a credit analyst with Moody's
Investors Service from 1991 to 1994.
Michael earned a Bachelor of Science degree from Bemidji State (Minn.)
University in 1990 and a Master of Business Administration degree from
Hofstra University in 1992. He is a Chartered Financial Analyst and a
member of the CFA Society Boston. He is also the vice chair of the board
of Horizons for Homeless Children, a Boston-based nonprofit
organization dedicated to combatting the negative impact of homelessness
on children and families.
Heidi W. Hardin is executive vice president and general counsel at MFS
Investment Management® (MFS®). She leads the Legal, Compliance and
Enterprise Risk Management departments and is a member of the firm's
Enterprise Leadership Team and the Chairman's Committee.
Heidi joined MFS in 2017 from Harris Associates, where she had been the
general counsel since 2015. She spent the prior 16 years at Janus
Capital Group Inc., holding multiple senior legal roles, with her last
role being senior vice president and general counsel of Janus Capital
Management LLC, the firm's global asset management business. Earlier in
her career she was a vice president, senior legal counsel and chief
compliance officer for Liberty Funds Group and a litigation associate at
Beeler Schad & Diamond P.C. She began her career in the financial
services industry in 1993.
Heidi earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from DePauw University and a
Juris Doctor degree from Chicago- Kent College of Law. She is a member
of the board of directors of ICI Mutual Insurance Company and the
Advisory Board of The Boston Ballet.
Address
BOSTON
Phone
1-800-637-8255 Angela Fader
Sr Assist Analyst at MFS Investment Management
Greater Phoenix Area
https://www.blbglaw.com/cases-investigations/mfs-mutual-fund-litigation
MFS Mutual Fund Fraud Litigation
| Court: |
United States District Court for the District of Maryland |
| Case Number: |
04-md-15863 |
| Class Period: |
12/15/1998 - 12/08/2003 |
Following a hearing on May 3, 2004 in the massive mutual fund
litigation, the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland appointed BLB&G client the City of Chicago Deferred
Compensation Plan as Lead Plaintiff in the securities fraud class action
against Massachusetts Financial Services Company ("MFS"), the
investment advisor to the MFS Funds, and others.
On March 1, 2006, the Court sustained the Consolidated Amended Class
Action Complaint, allowing the case to move forward against certain
defendants.
SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS:
The Complaint in this litigation alleges that MFS and certain of its
senior executives were aware of, engaged in and facilitated "timing"
trades in the MFS Funds: a money-making act involving short-term trading
in and out of a mutual fund. The technique is designed to exploit
inefficiencies in the way mutual fund companies price their shares by
allowing certain customers to trade shares at distorted prices that no
longer reflect the true value of the fund. As a result, those few
customers permitted to engage in market timing typically reap huge
profits, the cost of which are borne primarily by the long-term
investors in the relevant fund.
The public filings issued by the Defendants stated that, "MFS funds
do not permit market-timing or other excessive trading practices that
may disrupt portfolio management strategies and may harm fund
performance." In reality, however, the Defendants knew, or recklessly
disregarded, the fact that trades were being timed and that these timed
trades negatively and materially impacted the MFS Funds, thereby causing
significant losses to investors in the MFS Funds.
On February 5, 2004, MFS agreed to entry of a cease and desist order
by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") against MFS and John
W. Ballen ("Ballen"), MFS's current chief executive officer, and Kevin
R. Parke ("Parke"), MFS's current president and chief investment officer
("Cease and Desist Order"). Specifically, the SEC found that MFS,
Ballen and Parke allowed widespread market timing trading in certain MFS
Funds from at least late 1999 through October 2003, in contravention of
the Funds' public disclosures. In particular, MFS explicitly informed
certain select brokers in a written memo that "unrestricted" trading
would be permitted in certain MFS funds (known internally at MFS as
"Unrestricted Funds"), including the Massachusetts Investors Growth
Stock Fund, "even if a pattern of excessive trading has been detected."
Not only did MFS selectively enforce its market-timing policies, but
executives at MFS facilitated the frequent trading in and out of certain
MFS Funds by steering select investors to these "Unrestricted Funds."
As the Cease and Desist Order confirms, as much as $2 billion in timing
money flowed into MFS Funds during the Class Period.
Internal MFS documents and policies acknowledged that market timing
was detrimental to long-term shareholders. In fact, as early as June
2000, an internal presentation entitled "Market Timing Wheel of Terror,"
warned that "[l]ong term investors are being penalized" by market
timing activity. Nevertheless, the market timing activity persisted in
the MFS "Unrestricted Funds." Moreover, MFS's select enforcement of its
trading policies also included late trading, which alone caused well
over $100 million in investor losses. And, as further alleged in the
complaint, various brokers and financial institutions also participated
in the market timing schemes, to the detriment of ordinary investors.
MFS's policy of allowing market-timing and steering select investors
to the "Unrestricted Funds" was adopted as a means to increase profits
by luring market timing assets so as to increase funds under management,
and, therefore, increase fees paid to MFS for investment advisory
services. These additional assets under management also resulted in an
increased bonus pool from which MFS employees, including Ballen and
Parke, were paid excessive compensation. During this period, none of
the above detailed material information was disclosed to the members of
the Class. In addition to the profits from their market timing, MFS
also profited by charging ordinary investors hundreds of millions of
dollars in management fees while breaching their fiduciary duties to
those very same investors.
On May 20, 2010, the Court preliminarily approved proposed
settlements, totaling $75,042,250, that would resolve this litigation.
On October 25, 2010, the Court entered Judgments granting final approval
to the settlements and entered separate Orders granting Plaintiffs'
Counsel's application for an award of attorneys' fees and expenses and
approving the Plan of Allocation of the settlement proceeds.
The claims administration process has concluded and the net
settlement fund has been fully disbursed. This matter is considered
closed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
IN RE MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT
LITIGATION
This Document Relates To:
In re MFS
04-md-15863-04
MDL 1586
Case No. 04-MD-15863
(Judge J. Frederick Motz)
BRUCE RIGGS, et al., Individually and
On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
MASSACHUSETTS FINANCIAL
SERVICES COMPANY, et al.
Defendants.
Case No. 04-cv-01162-JFM
CONSOLIDATED AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
95
Dated: September 29, 2004 BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER
& GROSSMANN LLP
/s/
ALAN SCHULMAN
ROBERT S. GANS
TIMOTHY A. DeLANGE
JERALD D. BIEN-WILLNER
12544 High Bluff Drive, Suite 150
San Diego, CA 92130
Tel: (858) 793-0070
Fax: (858) 793-0323
-and-
J. ERIK SANDSTEDT
JOSEPH A. FONTI
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019
Tel: (212) 554-1400
Fax: (212) 554-1444
Lead Counsel
Dated: September 29, 2004 TYDINGS & ROSENBERG LLP
/s/
WILLIAM C. SAMMONS, Fed Bar No. 02366
JOHN B. ISBISTER, Fed Bar No. 00639
100 East Pratt Street, 26th Floor
Baltimore, MD 21202
Tel: (410) 752-9700
Fax: (410) 727-5460
Liaison Counsel ---------- Original message --------- From: Minister of Finance / Ministre des Finances <minister-ministre@fin.gc.ca>Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:56 PM Subject: Automatic reply: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management To: David Amos < david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments.Le ministère des Finances Canada accuse réception de votre
courriel. Nous vous assurons que vos commentaires sont
les bienvenus. ---------- Original message --------- From: Fraser, Sean - M.P. <Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:57 PM Subject: Automatic reply: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management To: David Amos < david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contacting the constituency office of Sean Fraser, Member of Parliament for Central Nova.
This is an automated reply.
Please
note that all correspondence is read, however due to the high volume of
emails we receive on a daily basis there may be a delay in getting back
to you. Priority will be given
to residents of Central Nova.
To ensure we get back to you in a timely manner, please include your full name, home address including postal code and phone number
when reaching out.
Thank you.
-------------
Merci d'avoir contacté le bureau de circonscription de Sean Fraser, député de Central Nova. Il s'agit d'une réponse automatisée.
Veuillez noter que toute la correspondance est lue, mais qu'en raison du
volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons quotidiennement, il se peut
que nous ne puissions pas vous répondre dans les meilleurs délais.
Pour que nous puissions vous répondre dans les meilleurs délais, veuillez indiquer votre nom complet, votre adresse personnelle, y compris le code postal, et votre numéro de téléphone
lorsque vous nous contactez.
Nous vous remercions.
Facebook : facebook.com/SeanFraserMP
Twitter : @SeanFraserMP
Instagram : SeanFraserMP
www.seanfrasermp.ca
Sans frais : 1-844-641-5886
---------- Original message --------- From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>Date: Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:53 PM Subject: Fwd: 617 954 4225 RE Robert Pozen Former executive chairman of MFS Investment Management To:
< bobpozen@mit.edu>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin
< fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>, ministryofjustice
< ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca>, justmin < justmin@gov.ns.ca>,
Mike.Comeau < Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>,
< CrownAdminOttawa@ontario.ca>, mcu < mcu@justice.gc.ca>,
Sean.Fraser < Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, pm < pm@pm.gc.ca>
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry
Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the first in a
series of hearings on the “Review of Current Investigations and
Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry.”
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
William H.
Donaldson
Chairman
Securities and Exchange Commission
Witness Panel 2
-
Mr.
Matthew P.
Fink
President
Investment Company Institute
-
Mr.
Marc
Lackritz
President
Securities Industry Association
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry
Date: Thursday, November 20, 2003
Time: 02:00 PM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the second in a
series of hearings on the “Review of Current Investigations and
Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry.”
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
Stephen M.
Cutler
Director - Division of Enforcement
Securities and Exchange Commission
-
Mr.
Robert
Glauber
Chairman and CEO
National Association of Securities Dealers
-
Eliot
Spitzer
Attorney General
State of New York
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding
the Mutual Fund Industry: Understanding the Fund Industry from the
Investor’s Perspective
Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2004
Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct a hearing on
“A Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the
Mutual Fund Industry: Understanding the Fund Industry from the
Investor’s Perspective.”
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
Tim
Berry
Treasurer
State of Indiana
-
Honorable
Gary
Gensler
Chairman
U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
-
Mr.
James K.
Glassman
Resident Fellow
American Enterprise Institute
-
Mr.
Don
Phillips
Managing Director
Morningstar, Inc
-
Mr.
Jim
Riepe
Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors
T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding
the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Operations and Governance.
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2004
Time: 02:00 PM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct a hearing on
“Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the
Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Operations and Governance.” Rescheduled
from February 3rd.
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
Jack
Bogle
Founder
The Vanguard Group
-
Ms.
Mellody
Hobson
President
Ariel Capital Management
-
Mr.
David
Pottruck
President, Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board of Directors
Charles Schwab
-
Mr.
David
Ruder
Former Chairmen
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: The Regulatory Landscape
Date: Wednesday, March 10, 2004
Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the sixth in a
series of hearings on "A Review of Current Investigations and
Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: The Regulatory
Landscape."
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Ms.
Lori
Richards
Director, Office of Compliance, Inspections, and Examinations
Securities and Exchange Commission
-
Mr.
Paul
Roye
Director, Division of Investment Management
Securities and Exchange Commission
-
Ms.
Mary
Schapiro
Vice Chairman of NASD and President of NASD Regulatory Policy & Oversight
National Association of Securities Dealers
-
Honorable
David M.
Walker
Comptroller General of the United States
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Operations and Governance
Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2004
Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the sixth in a
series of hearings on "A Review of Current Investigations and
Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Operations
and Governance."
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Professor
Mercer
Bullard
Associate Professor of Law
University of Mississippi School of Law
-
Mr.
William D
Lutz
Professor of English
Rutgers University
-
Mr.
Robert
Pozen
Non-Executive Chairman
Massachusetts Financial Services Co.
-
Ms.
Barbara
Roper
Director of Investor Protection
Consumer Federation of America
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding
the Mutual Fund Industry: Fund Costs and Distribution Practices
Date: Wednesday, March 31, 2004
Time: 02:30 PM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the nineth in a
series of hearings reviewing the current investigations and regulatory
actions in the mutual fund industry.
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Honorable
Daniel K.
Akaka (D-HI)
United States Senator
-
Honorable
Susan
Collins (R-ME)
United States Senator
-
Honorable
Peter
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
United States Senator
-
Honorable
Carl
Levin (D-MI)
United States Senator
Witness Panel 2
-
Mr.
Paul G.
Haaga, Jr.
Executive Vice President and Director of
Capitol Research and Management Company, and Chairman of the Investment
Company Institute
-
Mr.
Chet
Helck
President and Chief Operating Officer
Raymond James Financial
-
Mr.
Thomas
Putnam
Founder and CEO
Fenimore Asset Management
-
Mr.
Edward
Siedle
Founder and President
The Benchmark Companies
-
Mr.
Mark
Treanor
General Counsel and Head of Legal Department
Wachovia Corporation
Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry: The SEC's Perspective
Date: Thursday, April 8, 2004
Time: 10:00 AM
Topic
The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the tenth in a
series of hearings regarding a "Review of Current Investigations and
Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry". This hearing
will focus on the views of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Witnesses
Witness Panel 1
-
Mr.
William H.
Donaldson
Chairman
Securities and Exchange Commission
U.S . GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON :
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800
Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001
97–186 PDF 2004
S. HRG . 108–711
REVIEW OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS
AND REGULATORY ACTIONS REGARDING
THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST AND SECOND SESSION
ON
INVESTIGATIONS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS REGARDING THE
MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY AND INVESTORS’ PROTECTION
NOVEMBER 18, 20, 2003, FEBRUARY 25, 26, MARCH 2, 10, 23, 31, AND
APRIL 8, 2004
Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
(1)
REVIEW OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS
AND REGULATORY ACTIONS REGARDING
THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2003
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–538 of the Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Senator Richard C. Shelby (Chairman of
the Committee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN RICHARD C. SHELBY
Chairman SHELBY. The hearing shall come to order.
This hearing is part of the Committee’s ongoing oversight of the
mutual fund industry. Today, the Committee will review current
investigations and enforcement proceedings and examine regu-
latory actions taken to date in order to fully inform and guide the
Banking Committee’s consideration of possible legislative reform.
On September 30, 2003, this Committee first examined the scope
of problems confronting the mutual fund industry. At that time,
Chairman Donaldson testified about the SEC’s ongoing enforce-
ment actions and described the SEC’s regulatory blueprint for
adopting new regulations aimed at improving the transparency of
fund operations and stopping abusive trading practices. Since
Chairman Donaldson’s testimony, we have learned that improper
fund trading practices are a widespread problem that fund insiders,
brokers, and privileged clients have profited from at the expense of
average investors.
In early September, New York Attorney General Spitzer uncov-
ered arrangements through which brokers facilitated improper
trades for their clients in certain prominent mutual funds in ex-
change for large, fee generating investments. Since this initial set-
tlement, we have learned the extent to which both intermediaries,
such as brokers, and fund executives have engaged in illicit trading
activities. We have read about the backhanded ways by which the
brokers colluded with their customers to disguise improper trade
orders to make them appear legitimate, thus evading detection by
mutual fund policing systems.
Even in situations where mutual funds attempted to halt im-
proper trading activity, certain brokers created fictitious names
and account numbers to fool fund compliance officers and to con-
tinue trading. Recent investigations have also revealed that mutual
fund executives and portfolio managers have actively engaged in
2
improper trading activity. And these allegations are particularly
troubling because fund executives and portfolio managers have
represented themselves as protecting client assets, but they failed
by either knowingly permitting improper trading by brokers or
actively engaging in illegal trading activities themselves.
Such practices may not only violate prospectus disclosures, but
also violate the fiduciary duties that funds owe to their share-
holders—the duties to treat all shareholders equitably and to pro-
tect shareholder interests. Further, regulators have indicated that
they may soon file charges against funds that have selectively
disclosed portfolio information to certain privileged investors and
fund executives that may have engaged in illegal insider trading by
acting on the basis of nonpublic information.
As this Committee made clear during Chairman William H.
Donaldson’s September 30 appearance here, a regulatory response
to improper trading activities is just one of the many actions that
the SEC must take to address the many troubling issues that have
come to light in the mutual fund industry. This Committee remains
concerned with the transparency of fund operations and ensuring
that investors can learn how their fund is being managed. It has
become very, very apparent that many of the questionable fund
practices that are now being examined are not just the result of a
few bad actors, but are longstanding industry practices that have
largely gone unregulated and not well disclosed to, or understood
by, most investors.
Therefore, this Committee must take a comprehensive look, I be-
lieve, at the industry to determine if the industry’s operations and
practices are consistent with investors’ interests and the greater
interests of the market. It may be that we must consider possible
realignment of interests to ensure that mutual funds are operating
as efficiently and fairly as the market and investors demand. We
will examine fund disclosure practices regarding fees, trading costs,
sales commissions, and portfolio holdings. So, we will continue to
question the conflicts of interest surrounding the relationship be-
tween the investment adviser and the fund and how potential
changes to fund governance and disclosure practices may minimize
these conflicts.
We will also focus on fund sales practices to ensure that brokers
sell suitable investments to their clients, provide adequate disclo-
sure of any sales incentives, and give clients any breakpoint dis-
counts to which they are entitled.
Chairman Donaldson has told this Committee that the SEC has
the necessary statutory authority to reform the mutual fund indus-
try and is in the process of conducting a comprehensive rulemak-
ing. As we have learned in other contexts, however, additional reg-
ulation is not the only answer. Late trading is clearly illegal and
market timing is actively deterred and policed. Despite prohibitions
and warnings, these activities continued unabated because of the
inadequate compliance and enforcement regimes at the SEC, the
mutual funds and the brokers. Whether due to a lack of resources
or other pressing priorities, mutual fund abuses simply did not re-
ceive adequate attention from the SEC. Although recent enforce-
ment actions indicate that priorities have changed, we need to understand how the SEC will revise compliance programs to detect
and halt future fund abuses.
Vigorous enforcement remains the key to restoring integrity to
the fund industry, and Attorney General Spitzer’s timely actions
once again demonstrate, I believe, the significant role that States
play in prosecuting fraud and abuse in the securities markets. Re-
gardless of the number of rules or amount of resources, it would
be impractical to expect the SEC to detect every single fraud and
manipulation in the fund industry. Therefore, the mutual funds
and the brokerage houses themselves must proactively adopt new
compliance measures to detect fraud and abuse. For many years,
participants in the mutual fund industry maintain industry ‘‘best
practices.’’ These practices, however, have clearly proven to be in-
adequate as brokers and funds have disregarded conflicts of inter-
est and colluded at the expense of investors without detection.
Although funds and brokers owe different types of duties to their
investors, both groups have an obligation to refrain from knowingly
ignoring their clients’ interests and profiting at their expense.
With over 95 million investors and $7 trillion—yes, $7 trillion—
in assets, mutual funds have always been perceived as the safe
investment option for average investors. America has become a Na-
tion of investors, but there is no doubt that recent revelations
about mutual funds have caused very many to question the per-
ceived fairness of the industry. Many are surprised to learn that
the mutual fund industry is plagued by the same conflict that was
at the root of the Enron scandal and the global settlement—one set
of profitable rules for insiders and another costly set for average
investors.
Beyond the legal concepts of fiduciary duties and transparency,
there is a more fundamental principle that should underlie the
operation of the mutual fund industry and our securities markets
in general.
This principle is that securities firms and mutual funds should
not neglect investors’ interests and knowingly profit at their ex-
pense. Until firms can demonstrate an ability to abide by this
ideal, investors will not trust the markets, nor should they. In our
own way, Congress, the SEC and regulators, and industry partici-
pants must collectively work to reform the mutual fund industry in
order to restore investor confidence. I believe, we must reassure in-
vestors that mutual funds are a vehicle in which they can safely
invest their money and not fall victim to financial schemes. The
mutual fund industry is simply too important to too many Ameri-
cans to do otherwise.
Examining the mutual fund industry is a priority for this Com-
mittee, and I look forward to working with my fellow Committee
Members, especially Senators Enzi, Dodd, and Corzine, all of whom
have already expressed significant interest in this issue.
Our first witness today is Chairman Bill Donaldson, and on the
second panel we will hear from Matthew Fink, President of the In-
vestment Company Institute, and Marc Lackritz, President of the
Securities Industry Association.
Now, I will call on my Members.
Senator Sarbanes.
Statement of Robert C. Pozen
Chairman
MFS Investment Management
and
Visiting Professor
Harvard Law School
“REVIEW OF CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS
REGARDING THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY:
FUND OPERATIONS AND GOVERNANCE”
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
March 23, 2004
Thank you Chairman Shelby, Ranking Member Sarbanes and other members of the
Committee for this opportunity to present my views on appropriate reforms for the mutual fund
industry.
My name is Robert C. Pozen and I am from Boston, Massachusetts. I am currently
Chairman of MFS Investment Management, which manages approximately $140 billion for
approximately 370 accounts including over 100 mutual funds serving approximately six million
investors. I am also a visiting professor at Harvard Law School and author of the textbook The
Mutual Fund Business (2 ed. Houghton Mifflin 2001).
I commend the Committee for engaging in a deliberative and broad-ranging review of the
operations and regulation of the mutual fund industry. While I welcome questions about any
aspect of the fund industry, I will limit my testimony today to three areas where I believe that MFS is helping to set important new standards for the fund industry:
1) maximized shareholder valuethrough fund brokerage; 2) individualized reporting of shareholder expenses; and 3) structural enhancements for fund governance. We are making changes in these three areas to benefit MFS shareholders and, if followed by the rest of the industry, to benefit all fund shareholders.
I. Reducing Reliance on Soft Dollars
The current system of paying for goods and services with “soft dollars”, taken out of
brokerage commissions, is detrimental to mutual fund shareholders. The use of “soft dollar”
payments makes it virtually impossible for a fund manager to ascertain the true costs of executing trades because execution costs are bundled together with the costs of other goods and services such as research reports and Bloomberg terminals. If these costs were unbundled, then fund managers could pay cash out of their own pockets for independent research or market data, and could negotiate for lower execution prices for fund shareholders.
Currently, if a trader from a mutual fund executes fund trades through a full-service
broker on Wall Street, the trader pays five cents a share for execution plus a broad range of
goods or services from the executing broker or third parties: e.g., securities research, market data and brokerage allocations to promote fund sales. These goods and services are paid in “soft dollars”: that is, they are bundled into the five cents per share charge in a non- transparent
1 of 6
manner. If MFS does not accept these ancillary goods or services through “soft dollars”, it will still
be required to pay five cents per share by the full-service broker.
In other words, it is almost impossible to obtain a price discount from a full-service
Wall Street firm for executing a large fund trade. However, that firm is willing to provide an in-kind
discount in the form of soft dollars that can be used to purchase various goods or services. This is
more than a technical pricing oddity. The key point is this: a price discount on the trade (for
example, from five cents to three cents per share) would go directly to the mutual fund and its
shareholders. In-kind services like market data services go directly to the fund management
company and only indirectly to the mutual fund and its shareholders.
MFS has already eliminated the use of “soft dollars” to promote sales of mutual fund
shares. Since January 1, 2004, MFS has been paying cash out of its own pocket to broker-
dealers to promote fund sales. While the SEC has proposed a rule to this effect, MFS has
switched from soft dollars to cash to promote fund sales regardless of whether and when the SEC
adopts its rule.
More dramatically, earlier this month MFS decided to stop using soft dollars to pay for
third-party research1 and market data. Again MFS will pay cash out of its own pocket for these
items. MFS estimates that this decision will cost the management company $10 to $15 million per
year. Yet MFS has agreed not to raise its advisory fees for its funds over the next five years.
Why
is MFS willing to take the lead on getting off the addiction to soft
dollars and moving to the healthy environment of price discounts?
The
simple answer is: MFS puts the fund shareholder first. We recognize the
need to employ a full-service broker to execute a large block trade
(e.g., 500,000 shares in Genzyme); we need their skills and capital to
actively work the trade and take up a portion of the trade themselves if
necessary. But we want to pay a price in the range of three cents per
share for an agency-only trade, though we are willing to pay more for a
trade requiring capital to be put at risk by the broker-dealer.
1
We are not stopping the use of “soft dollars” for proprietary research
and other services. Only recently has the SEC issued a concept release
on accounting for all the elements of a bundled commission. SEC Release
IC-26313 (Dec. 19, 2003).
2 of 6
The broader answer is that MFS wants to lead the industry to lower and more transparent execution costs. To accomplish this objective, MFS will need support from other asset managers as well as the SEC. Section 28(e) of the Securities Exchange Act provides a safe harbor for asset managers using “soft dollars” for research and brokerage services. Initially, the SEC interpreted this safe harbor narrowly--allowing payment in “soft dollars” only if a good or service or product were not readily available for cash. Several years later, however, the SEC broadened the safe harbor to include any “legitimate” purpose for soft dollars (SEC Exchange Act Release 23170, April 23, 1986). The SEC should move back to its initial narrow interpretation of 28(e) to reduce the reliance on the use of “soft dollars”.
II. Individualized Expense Reporting
MFS will issue an individualized quarterly statement, rather than a general listing of fund expenses in basis points, which will show each fund shareholder a reasonable estimate of his or her actual fund expenses in dollar terms.
The MFS design for this individualized quarterly statement is cost effective as a result of one key assumption: that shareholders hold their funds for the whole prior quarter. This assumption is reasonable because over 90% of MFS shareholders fall into this category.
At present, the prospectus of every mutual fund contains an expense table listing the
various categories of fund expenses in basis points. The table might say, for instance:
Advisory Fee 53 bp
Transfer Agency Fee 10 bp
Other Fees 2 bp
12 b-1 Fee 25 bp
Total Expenses 90 bp
In addition, the prospectus of every fund includes a hypothetical example of a $10,000 investment in the fund to show the dollar amount of actual fund expenses paid by such a fund shareholder during the relevant period. The hypothetical example for the mutual fund with the expenses described above, for instance, would show $90 in total fund expenses over the last year.
Nevertheless, some critics have argued that mutual fund investors need customized
expense statements. By that, these critics mean the actual expenses paid by a shareholder in
3 of 6
several funds based on his or her precise holding period as well as the fund dividends during that
period. For example, we would have to compute the exact expenses of a shareholder who held
Fund A from January 15 until March 31 without reinvesting fund dividends; another shareholder
who held Fund B for the whole year and reinvested all fund dividends; and yet another
shareholder who held Fund C from February 1 until June 15 as well as from August 22 until
December 11 (during both periods, assuming no record date for fund dividends occurred).
This type of customized expense statement would, in my opinion, involve enormous
computer programming costs. The program would have to track the holdings of every fund
shareholder on a daily basis, take into account whether a fund dividend was reinvested or paid
out to the shareholder, and apply monthly basis point charges to fund balances reflecting monthly
appreciation or depreciation of fund assets. Of course, these large computer costs would
ultimately be passed on to fund shareholders.
At MFS, we will provide every fund shareholder with an estimate of his or her actual
expenses on their quarterly statements.2 We can do this at an affordable cost by making one
reasonable assumption—that the fund holdings of the shareholder at the end of the quarter were
the same throughout the quarter. Although this is a simplifying assumption, it produces a good
estimate of actual fund expenses since most shareholders do not switch funds during a quarter.
Indeed, this assumption will often lead to a slightly higher estimate of individualized expenses
than the actual amount because some shareholders will buy the fund during the quarter and other
shareholders will reinvest fund dividends during the quarter.
In addition, MFS will send its shareholders in every fund’s semi-annual report the
total amount of brokerage commissions paid by the fund during the relevant period as well as the
fund’s average commission rate per share (for example, 4.83 cents per share on average). But
this information on brokerage commissions should be separated from the fund expense table
because all the other items in the table are ordinary expenses expressed in basis points. By
contrast, brokerage commissions are a capital expense added to the tax basis of the securities
held by the fund, and brokerage commissions are expressed in cents per share.
2 These individualized expenses will not include brokerage costs because they are capitalized in the cost of the portfolio
security.
4 of 6
II. Enhanced Governance Structure
The mutual fund industry has a unique governance structure: the fund is a separate entity from its external manager. The independent directors of the fund must annually approve the
terms and conditions of the fund’s contract with its external manager. Of course, the independent directors usually reappoint the management company. In an industrial company, how often do the directors throw out the whole management team? But the independent directors of most mutual funds, in my experience, do represent fund shareholders by negotiating for contract terms and monitoring potential conflicts of interest.
At MFS, we believe we have the most advanced form of corporate governance in the
industry. To begin with, over 75% of the board is comprised of independent directors, who elect their own independent chairman. The chairman leads the executive sessions of independent directors, which occur before or after every board meeting. The independent chairman also helps set the board’s agenda for each meeting. A lead independent director could definitely take charge of the executive sessions and a lead director could also help set the board’s agenda. Thus, it
does not matter which title is employed; the key is to insure that a senior independent director
plays these two functions.
In many boards, the independent directors have their own independent counsel, as
the MFS boards do. But the independent directors of the MFS funds are going one step further by
appointing their own compliance officer. This officer will monitor all compliance activities by MFS
as well as supervise the fund’s own activities, and will report regularly to the Compliance
Committee of the Board (which itself is composed solely of independent directors).
On the management company side, MFS is the only company I know of that has a
non-executive chairman reporting to the independent directors of the MFS funds. This is a new
position designed to assure that the management company is fully accountable to the funds’
independent directors.
Finally, MFS as a management company has established the new position of Executive Vice President for Regulatory Affairs, and filled the position with a distinguished industry veteran. In addition, MFS has hired a distinguished law firm partner as its new general
5 of 6
counsel.
Both will serve on the executive committee of MFS. The new Executive
Vice President will be in charge of several regulatory
functions—compliance, internal audit and fund treasury.
This high profile position within MFS is more than symbolic; it represents the great significance
given by MFS to these regulatory functions. While these functions are performed in most fund
management
companies, it is rare to see the person in charge of these functions
having the title of executive vice president and serving on the
executive committee of the firm.
Conclusions
In summary, MFS is trying to establish standards of best practices in three important
areas to fund shareholders:
1) reduced reliance on “soft dollars”, 2) individualized expense reporting, and 3)
enhanced governance structure. Other management firms are trying to
take the lead in setting industry standards in other areas. At the same
time, the SEC is in the process of
proposing and adopting a myriad of
rules on disclosure requirements and substantive prohibitions or the
fund industry—which overlap to a degree with the efforts of the fund
management firms.
Because the SEC and the management firms are making such serious efforts to develop
higher
behavioral norms for the mutual fund industry, it might be useful for
Congress to monitor these efforts before finalizing a bill on mutual
fund reforms. These are complex issues that may be better suited to an
evolutionary process, led by an expert public agency with the
flexibility to address the changing legal and factual environment.
Thank you again for this opportunity to testify on mutual fund reform. I would be pleased
to answer any questions the Chairman or Committee Members might have.
6 of 6
Robert C. Pozen
- Former president of Fidelity Investments and executive chairman of MFS Investment Management
- Expert who has made hundreds of appearances to companies, television audiences and leaders around the world
- Writer
for the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times,
the Harvard Business Review, and more around the globe
Leadership
- John Dugan—Associate Director (Enforcement)
- Kevin Kelcourse—Associate Director (Examinations)
Leadership
- Sheldon Pollock—Associate Director (Enforcement)
- Thomas Smith—Associate Director (Enforcement)
- Mark Sylvester—Associate Director (Enforcement)
- Lourdes Caballes—Associate Director (Examinations)
- Maurya Keating—Associate Director (Examinations)
175 W. Jackson Boulevard, Suite 1450,
Chicago ,
IL
60604
Leadership
- Tina Diamantopoulos—Associate Director (Examinations)
- Louis Gracia—Associate Director (Examinations)
- Anne McKinley—Acting Associate Director (Enforcement)
- Paul Montoya—Associate Director (Enforcement)
Kevin
Muhlendorf became the SEC's Inspector General in July 2025. For the
previous nine years, he was a partner in the white-collar defense and
government investigations practice at Wiley Rein LLP in Washington D.C.,
where he focused on representing individuals and entities in criminal
and civil securities enforcement matters.
In private practice, Mr. Muhlendorf regularly conducted sensitive
internal investigations and provided compliance counseling for clients.
While on secondment from Wiley Rein for portions of 2023 and 2024, Mr.
Muhlendorf served as Acting Inspector General for the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), where he led approximately
three dozen auditors and special agents conducting investigations and
issuing financial and performance audits. He also designed and
implemented a whistleblower award pilot program.
Since 2015, Mr. Muhlendorf has taught a class on financial fraud
investigations as an adjunct professor at Georgetown Law. He is both a
Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) and Certified Compliance & Ethics
Professional (CCEP).
Mr. Muhlendorf’s previous law enforcement experience includes six
years as a Trial Attorney and Assistant Chief in the Securities and
Financial Fraud Unit of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal
Division, Fraud Section, where he investigated and tried complex fraud
cases in jurisdictions across the country. Mr. Muhlendorf was a Senior
Counsel in the SEC Enforcement Division from 2004 to 2010.
Mr. Muhlendorf began his legal career as a litigation associate at
Steptoe & Johnson LLP after serving as a federal judicial law clerk
to Judge John M. Facciola in Washington D.C. He earned his BA in history
from the University of Virginia and his law degree from William &
Mary Law School.
Danae
Serrano was named the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Ethics
Counsel in March 2019. She previously served as Acting Ethics Counsel
since December 2018.
Ms. Serrano joined the SEC in 2010 as an Assistant Ethics Counsel,
and has served as the Deputy Ethics Counsel and Alternate Designated
Agency Ethics Official since 2013. Ms. Serrano also served as the
Agency’s Acting Chief Compliance Officer until August 2018.
Before joining the SEC, Ms. Serrano served as an attorney in the
General Counsel’s Office of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
(PBGC), where she advised on government ethics and administrative law
matters. Prior to PBGC, Ms. Serrano served as an attorney and ethics
official in the United States Air Force, Office of the General Counsel.
Ms. Serrano received her law degree from the University of
Connecticut School of Law, where she was an Executive Editor of the
Connecticut Insurance Law Journal. She received her B.A. in History from
Yale University.
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>Date: Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 2:03 PM Subject: Anybody notice Mark Carney and David Eby at the top of this old email? To: < peter.mackay@mcinnescooper.com>, < rchedore@mosherchedore.ca>, < cei@nbnet.nb.ca>, Richard.Bragdon < richard.bragdon@parl.gc.ca>, news < news@chco.tv>, news957 < news957@rogers.com>, news-tips < news-tips@nytimes.com>, < paulpalango@eastlink.ca>, rfife < rfife@globeandmail.com>, jan.jensen < jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>, < john.nater@parl.gc.ca>, John.Williamson < john.williamson@parl.gc.ca>, < roman.baber@parl.gc.ca>, melissa.lantsman < melissa.lantsman@parl.gc.ca>, < adam@adamrodgers.ca>, Jenny.Kwan < jenny.kwan@parl.gc.ca>, Gord.Johns < gord.johns@parl.gc.ca>, Heather.McPherson < heather.mcpherson@parl.gc.ca> , dan.albas < dan.albas@parl.gc.ca>, Bob.Zimmer < bob.zimmer@parl.gc.ca>, < todd.doherty@parl.gc.ca>, < frank.caputo@parl.gc.ca>, < mark.strahl@parl.gc.ca>, < sukhman.gill@parl.gc.ca> Cc: pierre.poilievre < pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, francis.scarpaleggia < francis.scarpaleggia@parl.gc.ca>, Yves-Francois.Blanchet < Yves-Francois.Blanchet@parl.gc.ca>, < news@radioabl.ca>, < david.myles@parl.gc.ca>, Michael.Duheme < Michael.Duheme@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, < mia.urquhart@cbc.ca>, Robert. Jones < Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, < hjohnson@townofriverview.ca>, < jcoughlan@townofriverview.ca> , < wbennett@townofriverview.ca>, < jthorne@townofriverview.ca>, warren.mcbeath < warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, Mark.Blakely < Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, mcu < mcu@justice.gc.ca>, rob.moore < rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, Sean.Fraser < Sean.Fraser@parl.gc.ca>, < Aaron.Kennedy@gnb.ca>, < aaron.gunn@parl.gc.ca>, Susan.Holt < Susan.Holt@gnb.ca>, robert.mckee < robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, robert.gauvin < robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor < Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.gc.ca>, David.Coon < David.Coon@gnb.ca>, kris.austin < kris.austin@gnb.ca>, davidmylesforfredericton@gmail.com < DavidMylesForFredericton@gmail.com>, < mike.dawson@parl.gc.ca>, < david.mcguinty@parl.gc.ca>, < ps.ministerofpublicsafety-ministredelasecuritepublique.sp@ps-sp.gc.ca>, Wayne.Long < Wayne.Long@parl.gc.ca>, fin.minfinance-financemin.fin < fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca>, dominic.leblanc < dominic.leblanc@parl.gc.ca>, don.davies < don.davies@parl.gc.ca>, Frank.McKenna < Frank.McKenna@td.com>, < francois-philippe.champagne@parl.gc.ca>, < melanie.joly@ised-isde.gc.ca> , pm < pm@pm.gc.ca>, Steven.MacKinnon < Steven.MacKinnon@parl.gc.ca>, < Patrick.Fitzgerald@skadden.com>, washington field < washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, mdcohen212 < mdcohen212@gmail.com>, premier < premier@ontario.ca>, premier < premier@gov.yk.ca>, Office of the Premier < scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>, premier < premier@gov.pe.ca>, premier < premier@gov.nl.ca>, premier < premier@gov.ab.ca>, prontoman1 < prontoman1@protonmail.com>, ragingdissident < ragingdissident@protonmail.com>, < jasonlavigne@outlook.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:43:47 -0300
Subject: Hey you in the BCC line its "Just Dave" and we just talked
please share these emails with anyone and everyone you wish
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:13:32 -0300
Subject: Lets see Mark Carney and Warren Buffet deny knowing about my
concerns now EH Jimmy Flaherty?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:54:45 -0400
Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: Small wonder the Wall Street Jounal
now blocks my comments EH Petey Baby Stoffer and Tommy boy Young
I am currently away from the office. Je ne suis pas disponible.
If the matter is urgent, please contact Dale Alexander at 782-8782. Si
c'est urgent, veuillez composer 782-8782.
====================================================================================
La version française suit le texte anglais.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and
the Bank of
Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or
copying of this
email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is
unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it
immediately from
your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou
confidentielle.
La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent.
Toute diffusion,
utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par
une
personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite. Si
vous recevez
ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer
sans délai à
l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez
éliminé de votre
ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:38:41 -0300
Subject: Hey Wayne Carlin read Dan Mangan's and the New York Post's
bullshit about Bernie Madoff, high finance and your corrupt Fed pals.
Too Too Funny EH?
NEW YORK POST
(212) 930-8000
It appears that the far from funny reporter who know nothing of
ethical journalism doesn't know I know who owns him.
It certainly appears to me that his lawyer Arthur M. Siskind hasn't
the savy to even read his master's law blog so why should i be
surprised at how dumb Rupert's reporter's are EH?
5:23 pm June 13, 2008
David Raymond Amos wrote:
After you check my work perhaps you should mention my name as you ask
your Senators such as McCain and Obama who wanna be President why the
trancripts etc of these hearings have dissappeared. from the public
record. EH?
For the record this nasty puppy of rupert's was in his office when i
sent this email and others. Hell I talked to him before I sent him the
emails I promised and all he succeeded in doing was pissing me off. He
knows I am am a for real dude.
Veritas Vincit
David Raymond Amos
Do these dudes smell foul play tommorrow. I certainly do. Its kinda
funny these lawyers won't talk to me EH?
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:00:33 -0400
Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: We just talked Mr. Litt the instant
you bullshitted me I knew the score between you, the FBI and I
CORRECT?
Hello --
If you are a real person rather than a spam email generator, please
Instead of to this address, which I rarely if ever check.
Thanks -- Dan Mangan, Reporter, New York Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended
recipient (or responsible for delivery of the message to the
intended recipient), you are hereby notified that you have received
this transmission in error; any review, dissemination, distribution
or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
by reply or by telephone (call us at 212-930-8000) and immediately
delete this message and all its attachments. Any content of this
message and its attachments that does not relate to the official
business of NYP Holdings, Inc. must be taken not to have been sent
or endorsed by any of them. No warranty is made that the e-mail or
attachment(s) are free from computer viruses or other defects.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:00:17 -0300
Subject: Fwd: We just talked Mr. Litt the instant you bullshitted me I
knew the score between you, the FBI and I CORRECT?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:54:28 -0300
Subject: We just talked Mr. Litt the instant you bullshitted me I knew
the score between you, the FBI and I CORRECT?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:38:08 -0300
Subject: Fwd: Perhaps somebody will call me back now EH Ms. Clark? 506 756
8687
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 17:34:50 -0300
Subject: Perhaps somebody will call me back now EH Ms. Clark? 506 756 8687
I just talked to the man in the Banker's Umbudsman's office who has
had my file since 2005. Lets just say that I was greatly offended.
Nathalie Clark
General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary
Tel: (416) 362-6093, ext. 214
As I am trying to contact the Pugwash people once again I cross paths
with more nasty Yankees trying hard to play dumb?
Need I say that Non Profit corps such as this offend me greatly?
Veritas Vincit
David Raymond Amos
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:57:48 -0400
Subject: Trust that whatever covert deal that Bernie Madoff and KPMG
etc may make with the Feds they are not fooling mean old me
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 07:41:20 -0500
Subject: RE: I did talk the lawyers Golub and Flumenbaum tried to
discuss Bernie Madoff and KPMG etc before sending these emails
Dear Mr. Amos,
I am General Counsel at Goulston & Storrs. Your email below to
Messers. Rosensweig and Reisch has been forwarded to me for response.
While it's not clear what type of assistance, if any, you seek from
Goulston % Storrs, please be advised that we are not in a position to
help you. Please do not send further communications to any of our
attorneys. We will not be able to respond, and your communications
will not be protected by the attorney-client privilege.
We wish you well in the pursuit of your concerns.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Sartory
-----Original Message-----
From: David Amos [mailto:
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 8:18 PM
To: Rosensweig, Richard J.; info@LAtaxlawyers.com; Reisch, Alan M.;
Subject: Fwd: I did talk the lawyers Golub and Flumenbaum tried to
discuss Bernie Madoff and KPMG etc before sending these emails
Perhaps somebody should call me back now. EH? (506 756 8687)
Richard J. Rosensweig
(617) 574-3588
Just Dave
By Location Visit Detail
Visit 7,231
Domain Name (Unknown)
IP Address 63.117.201.# (Mass Mutual)
ISP Verizon Business
Location Continent : North America
Country : United States (Facts)
State : New York
City : New York
Lat/Long : 40.7619, -73.9763 (Map)
Language English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR
1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; .NET CLR
3.0.04506.648; MS-RTC LM 8)
Javascript version 1.3
Monitor Resolution : 1400 x 1050
Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit Mar 4 2009 6:13:04 pm
Last Page View Mar 4 2009 6:14:06 pm
Visit Length 1 minute 2 seconds
Page Views 2
Referring URL
Out Click View my complete profile
Time Zone UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time Mar 4 2009 5:13:04 pm
Visit Number 7,231
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 16:25:27 -0400
Subject: I did talk the lawyers Golub and Flumenbaum tried to discuss
Bernie Madoff and KPMG etc before sending these emails
It appears to me that everybody knows everything and yet ignore mean old me
eh?
Perhaps everybody should Conrad Black's name and mine sometime EH?
"In a highly publicized trial in Delaware, Mr. Flumenbaum recently won
a battle for corporate control involving Hollinger International, as
well as a $30 million verdict against Conrad Black."
Flumenbaum claimed he never heard of me but welcomed my emails all the
same. Whem I asked Golub if he recalled how we had crossed paths
before he did not deny it but just could not recall tis all. Golub
told me he wanted to talk to his clients and get my emails from the
local cops instead of me. I understood in a hearbest that he just
wished to play dumb again. So I added a llittle more to this email and
clearly did as I promised.
Whereas you people won't speak honestly to me perhaps you should ask
the RCMP and and the FBI and the SEC etc what they know about my
affairs EH Yankees? I will try to talk to some of your clients now.
they are an interesting well mixed crowd to say the least and it
appaears that they are all justifiably pissed off at the Feds just
like I have been for many years.
Veritas Vincit
David Raymond Amos
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:12:26 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: I waited nearly two weeks for your lawyer to call me Paulette
now I will email and post this as i promised
I understood your hints about KPMG and the ex RCMP dudes It was kinda
a nobrainer to me after you selected that one email to respond too
after all that I had sent but why should I help you people with your
pensions while you people work hard to falsely imprison me once again?
This contains a true verison of he email I sent you over a month ago
about the crooked KPMG crowd
You complain of the RCMP treatment of you and your family yet you take
a new job trying to recruit new people for the RCMP to abuse. what
gives with that? I thought you were more honest and professional than
that. What do you tell the kids about your concerns with the the lack
of integrity of the RCMP as you suggest that they join the force?
Norman Inkster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BA (hons.), Commander of the C.St.J., LL.D. (born August 19, 1938)
served as 18th Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, from
September 1, 1987 to June 24, 1994. From 1992 until 1994 he also
served as President of Interpol. Born in Winnipeg, Manitoba, he was
educated at the University of New Brunswick, where he studied
sociology and psychology; during his studies he was continuously
employed in the Human Resources department of the RCMP.From 1994 to
2003 he was a partner with KPMG in Toronto, the latter part of which
he was global managing partner of the forensic practice. In 1995 he
was made an Officer of the Order of Canada. In 2003 he retired from
KPMG and started Inkster Group. He was the President of the Inkster
Group, which provides various security and policing services to a list
of international clients, including the Province of Ontario. In 2006
Inkster Group was acquired by Navigant Consulting where Inkster is now
a managing director.
David Amos wrote:
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:57:48 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: What kind of Bullshit Response is that Paulette
We also talked at least twice recently because your fellow cops
directed me to you instead of the dudes I wanted to speak to. You told
me that you gave my material to Kevin Jackson and commented that you
had not received any emails from me lately ( you never respnded to the
ones I sent in the past anyway) and I told you that they had been
blocked by your pals and I suggested that you talk to your incompetent
lawyer Gilmour. Remember lady? Anyway I was so pissed off by your pals
stalking me and putting the proof of their malice in Youtube that i
sent you some emails from my son's email address (your cop pals killed
my other email accounts) just to see if they would get through.
Surprise surprise some did and some did not. However Iknew that you
got yours Methinks there is some defections in your ranks. Perhaps you
and your fellow whisleblowers who cry alot in the Media should pick up
the phone and make a deal with a honest whistleblower and then tell
the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the benefit
of all Canadians EH? Everybody and his dog knows that the RCMP are as
crooked as hell and they only care about the RCMP and their pensions
not the interests of the people they were hired to serve and protect.
Vertias Vincit David Raymond Amos P.S. I will keep this email
in confidence for one day then email it to politicians and the media
and then post it on the web. Quit playing games and call me will ya?
they may be a very importenat election in the near future and our
affairs may become of interest to some smiling bastards loooking to
get relected. Obviously nobody can deny that you and I did not cross
paths before the 39th Parliament sat on April 4th, 2006 and you
refused to act within the scope of your employment for some strange
reason and shortly thereafter your former lawyer Richard Bell whom I
had crossed paths with in 2004 became the first judge Stevey boy
Harper appointed Surprise Surprise N'est Pas? 506 434 1379 Please use
it tomorrow before I file my first complaints in Federal Court.
David,
I received your voice mail, I have been transferred to another unit
and I am unaware of who is dealing with your complaints at this time.
Paulette Delaney-Smith, Cpl.
RCMPolice "J" DIvision HQ
>>> David Amos 01/03/08 12:49 AM >>>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:49:27 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: Fwd: Response to your emails
CC: Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:49:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fwd: Response to your emails
Whereas you RCMP people refused to act within the scope of your
employment and investigate major crimes Tis time for me to sue many
bankers too N'est Pas Ms. Paulette Delaney-Smith and your old buddy
Louie Lefebvre?
Whereas you RCMP people refused to act within the scope of your
employment and investigate major crimes Tis time for me to sue many
bankers too N'est Pas Ms. Paulette Delaney-Smith and your old buddy
Louie Lefebvre?
Subject: Response to your emails
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:16:12 -0500
From: "US-KPMG FW Ombudsman Office"
To: ,
Dear Mr. Amos,
Thank you for contacting us. We have reviewed the information that you
provided in your emails, and are not able to determine what specific
issues you are raising that we should consider investigating. Thus, in
order to conduct an investigation, we need to gather more specific
information. Would you be willing to have a confidential conversation
with me, the Ombudsman here at KPMG LLP (US) or would you be willing
to provide me with a summary of your allegations as they relate to
KPMG LLP or its clients and any evidence to support those allegations?
Thank you for your continued assistance with this matter.
Thanks,
Michael Plansky
Ombudsman
***********************************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this
email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended
recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken
or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be
unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice
contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions
expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter.
***********************************************************************
|
|
|
