Joseph Dufresne (a/k/a Joseph James) and Megan Renkow (a/k/a Megan James), and their companies, United Business Servicing, LLC and United Business Servicing, Inc. (collectively United Business) are to pay USD4.9 million to settle CFTC charges regarding a the fraudulent sale of futures trading strategies and systems.
A Consent Order, entered by Judge John A. Kronstadt, US District Judge for the Central District of California, on 22 November, 2017, requires Dufresne, Renkow, and United Business jointly and severally, to pay restitution to defrauded investors totalling USD3,941,157 plus a USD1 million civil monetary penalty.
In addition to the monetary sanctions, the defendants are prohibited from, among other things, trading in any market regulated by the CFTC and from applying for registration or claiming exemption from registration with the CFTC in any capacity.
The Consent Order arises from a CFTC enforcement action filed against the Defendants on September 30, 2016 (see CFTC Complaint and Press Release: 7464-16, CFTC Charges California Residents Joseph Dufresne, Megan Renkow, and Their Company, United Business Servicing, Inc., doing business as Schooloftrade.com, with Fraudulently Marketing Commodity Futures Strategies and Systems).
In the Order, the Court finds that the Defendants engaged in a systematic pattern of materially false statements and omissions in connection with the marketing of SoT’s trading strategies and systems.
Specifically, the Court finds that Defendants: touted the profitability of SoT’s trading strategies and systems and claimed hundreds of thousands of trading profits earned every year when, in fact, none of Defendants’ accounts has ever been profitable; falsely represented to customers and prospective customers that Dufresne was a successful professional trader with years of experience and numerous awards when, in fact, Dufresne has little experience, has never been professionally recognised, and has never been a profitable trader; and purported to make profitable trades in live accounts in real time in SoT’s “Live Trade Room” when, in fact, none of the trades called or profits claimed to have been made in the “Live Trade Room” can be found in any of Defendants’ accounts. Additionally, the Court found that Defendants failed to prominently display in their various solicitation materials certain disclosure statements required under CFTC Regulations concerning simulated or hypothetical trading results and client testimonials.
