UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
In the Matter of
ORDER MAKING FINDINGS,
In connection with a public administrative proceeding instituted against him pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") and Sections 15(b) and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"), Sy Siegel ("Siegel") has submitted an Offer of Settlement ("Offer") to the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission"), which the Commission has determined to accept. Solely for the purpose of this proceeding and any other proceeding brought by or on behalf of the Commission or in which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings contained herein, except as to jurisdiction which is admitted, Siegel consents to the entry of the findings and orders set forth below.
On the basis of this Order Making Findings, Imposing Remedial Sanctions, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order ("Order") and the Offer submitted by Siegel, the Commission makes the following findings1:
A. Sy Siegel a/k/a Sy Stewart ("Siegel"), at the time of the conduct in question was a resident of California.
B. Stratford Acquisitions Corp. is located in Burlington, Ontario, Canada. The company purports to develop and manufacture concrete additives. The company's securities are penny stocks and are registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act and are listed on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol SFDA.
C. During the period from at least in or about July 1996 through August 1996, Siegel offered to pay, and did pay, undisclosed compensation to person(s) whom he believed to be registered representative(s) or registered principal(s), to induce such registered representatives, registered principals or persons to purchase the common stock of SFDA for the accounts of customers. For example, on or about August 20, 1996, Siegel transferred $3,500 to a broker-dealer which was undisclosed compensation for a previous purchase of 5,000 shares of SFDA at approximately $3.00 per share by the broker-dealer. Accordingly, Siegel willfully violated, and committed and caused violations of, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
D. Respondent Siegel has submitted a sworn financial statement and other evidence and has asserted his financial inability to pay disgorgement plus prejudgement interest. The Commission has reviewed the sworn financial statement and other evidence provided by Respondent Siegel and has determined that Respondent Siegel does not have the financial ability to pay disgorgement of $5,000 plus prejudgement interest.
Based on the foregoing, the Commission deems it appropriate and in the public interest to impose the sanctions and issue the cease-and-desist order as specified in the Offer of Settlement.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Respondent Siegel, effective immediately, cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder;
2. Respondent Siegel, effective immediately, be and hereby is barred from participation in penny stock offerings;
3. Respondent Siegel shall pay disgorgement of $5,000 plus prejudgment interest, but that payment of such amount be waived based upon Respondent Siegel's demonstrated financial inability to pay; and
4. The Division of Enforcement ("Division") may, at any time following the entry of this Order, petition the Commission to: (1) reopen this matter to consider whether Respondent Siegel provided accurate and complete financial information at the time such representations were made; and (2) seek any additional remedies that the Commission would be authorized to impose in this proceeding if Respondent Siegel's offer of settlement had not been accepted. No other issues shall be considered in connection with this petition other than whether the financial information provided by Respondent Siegel was fraudulent, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete in any material respect and whether any additional remedies should be imposed. Respondent Siegel may not, by way of defense to any such petition, contest the findings in this Order or the Commission's authority to impose any additional remedies that were available in the original proceeding.
By the Commission.
Jonathan G. Katz
|1||Any findings contained herein are made pursuant to Respondent Siegel's Offer of Settlement and are not binding on any other person or entity named as a respondent in this or any other proceeding.|
|Home | Previous Page||