SEC Accuses Illinois Stock Transfer Company and Robert Pearson of Paying Employees with Customers’ Money

Illinois Stock Transfer CompanyIllinois Stock Transfer Company (“IST”) and its owner, Robert G. Pearson, misappropriated money belonging to IST’s corporate clients and those clients’ shareholders in order to satisfy IST’s payroll and other business obligations, according to a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

The Peiffer Rosca securities practice attorneys Jason Kane and Joe Peiffer are investigating the matter.

Starting in March 2012, Pearson is alleged to have used customers’ funds to meet all of IST’s payroll and payroll tax obligations for employees who used direct deposit because IST did not earn enough income to cover its business expenses, according to the complaint.

The SEC stated that Pearson admitted to the scheme during a recent examination conducted by the SEC’s staff. IST and Pearson are believed to have misappropriated at least $1.3 million from an IST bank account holding commingled customer funds, according to the complaint.

The Peiffer Rosca securities attorneys often represent investors who lose money as a result of Ponzi schemes, investment fraud, or stockbroker misconduct. They are currently investigating the possibility of assisting victims with the recovery of their losses. They take most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advance the case costs, and only get paid for their fees and costs out of money they recover for their clients.

Investors who believe they lost money as a result of investment fraud or misconduct may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Rosca, Jason Kane or Joe Peiffer, for a free, no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at (585) 310-5140.

Peiffer Wolf (1248 Posts)

In our legal system, every person is innocent until and unless found guilty by a court of law or a tribunal. Whenever we reference “allegations” or charges that are “alleged,” such allegations or charges have not been proven, and are merely accusations, not findings of fault, as of the date of the blog. We do not have, nor do we undertake, a duty to continue to monitor or follow cases about which we report, and/or to publish subsequent blogs regarding various developments that may occur in such cases. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research regarding any such cases and any developments that may or may not have occurred in such cases.