Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

Private Equity Fund Adviser Settles with SEC
December 22, 2014

Earlier this year, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced plans to expand its task force examining private equity investment advisers. As discussed in the Spring 2014 issue of Expect Focus (“Private Equity: The Next Wave of SEC Enforcement Actions?”), the SEC identified what it believed were violations of law or material weaknesses in compliance controls regarding the collection and allocation of fees and expenses imposed by fund advisers in more than half of the investment fund manager examinations completed. On September 22, 2014, as a result of the first enforcement action under this heightened scrutiny, one fund adviser, Lincolnshire Management, Inc., agreed to pay approximately $2.3 million (including $450,000 in penalties) to settle a case arising from alleged simple carelessness in the allocation of fees and expenses to portfolio companies.

Lincolnshire acquired two portfolio companies in 1997 and 2001, each for a different Lincolnshire-advised fund. Lincolnshire planned to integrate the two portfolio companies over time for an eventual combined sale. Beginning in 2009, the companies shared a joint management team and operated, in many respects, as one company – even while remaining distinct legal entities and maintaining separate financial statements. The SEC alleged that (1) certain expenses benefiting the portfolio companies were disproportionately allocated by Lincolnshire and (2) no written expense allocation policy existed, resulting in violations of the Investment Advisers Act based on Lincolnshire’s purported negligent breach of its fiduciary duty, and its failure to maintain an adequate compliance program. The alleged violations reached as far back as 2005, and many occurred before Lincolnshire became a registered investment adviser in March 2012.

The Lincolnshire case is the first example of a likely trend toward growing SEC assertiveness in enforcement within the private equity industry. Previously, enforcement actions were generally reserved for more egregious legal violations, but the SEC now appears willing to seek penalties in cases arising largely from apparent “bookkeeping” errors that involve arguably small amounts of money that do not materially impact the performance of investments. Private equity industry compliance professionals are now officially on notice.
Related Practices
Securities Litigation and Enforcement Securities Transactions and Compliance Financial Services Regulatory Private Equity and Venture Capital
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.