U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
SEC Seal
Home | Previous Page
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Litigation Rel. No. 18414 / October 16, 2003

SEC v. Eric E. Resteiner, et al., (United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, C.A. No. 01-10637(PBS))

Commission Settles Fraud Charges Against Three Defendants in Connection with $22 Million Trading Scheme

The Commission announced today that, on September 15, 2003, a Massachusetts federal court entered a final judgment, by consent, against Charles G. Dyer of Manchester, Massachusetts, and two Massachusetts-based companies controlled by Dyer, Resource F, LLC, and Bunker Hill Aviation, LLC, in connection with a $22 million fraudulent trading scheme. The final judgment enjoined Dyer and his companies from further violations of the federal securities laws. The final judgment also ordered Dyer and his companies to pay a total of $577,667 in disgorgement and interest, and further ordered Dyer to pay a $110,000 civil penalty.

In its complaint, filed on April 16, 2001, the Commission alleged that, between 1997 and 2000, Dyer, Resource F, Bunker Hill Aviation, and others participated in a fraudulent trading scheme that raised approximately $22 million from at least 50 investors, many of whom were members of the Christian Science Church. According to the complaint, Dyer helped promote the trading scheme through Resource F and administered it through Bunker Hill Aviation, and solicited investors using misrepresentations typical of Prime Bank-type investment frauds, including that the investment involved high-quality debt instruments and that investors' principal was never at risk and could be returned after one year.

Without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint, Dyer, Resource F, and Bunker Hill Aviation consented to the judgment entered by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, which permanently enjoins them from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Dyer and Resource F also were enjoined from future violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, and Dyer was furthermore enjoined from future violations of Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act. Dyer, Resource F, and Bunker Hill Aviation also were held jointly and severally liable for disgorgement of $472,590, plus $99,321 pre-judgment interest and $5,755 post-judgment interest thereon, and Dyer was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $110,000. Dyer has also offered to settle related administrative proceedings, and the Commission instituted a settled Order on October 16, 2003, permanently barring Dyer from association with any investment adviser or broker-dealer.

Dyer, Resource F, and Bunker Hill Aviation were the last defendants in this case. The other defendants were Eric E. Resteiner and Voldemar A. VonStrasdas, both most recently of the Bahamas, and Miles M. Harbur of Jupiter, Florida. The District Court entered final judgments by default against Resteiner and VonStrasdas in August 2002, holding them jointly and severally liable for disgorgement of more than $25 million, and assessing each a civil penalty of $4.4million. The District Court also previously entered final judgment by consent against Harbur, holding him liable for disgorgement of $1.1 million, plus prejudgment interest thereon, but waiving payment based on Harbur's financial condition. As with Dyer, the District Court enjoined Resteiner, VonStrasdas, and Harbur from violating the antifraud and other provisions of the federal securities laws.

Unscrupulous promoters continue to victimize the public with Prime Bank schemes. Accordingly, investors are advised to access the Commission's "Prime Bank" Investor Alert that provides tips on how to avoid being a victim of these scams. The investor alert can be found on the Commission's web site, at www.sec.gov/divisions/enforce/primebank.shtml.

For further information, please see Litigation Release No. 16963 (April 16, 2001), Litigation Release No. 16969 (April 18, 2001), Litigation Release No. 17713 (Sept. 5, 2002), and Litigation Release No. 17858 (Nov. 22, 2002).



Modified: 10/17/2003