[15292]
October 23, 2002
TO: ADVERTISING COMPLIANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE No. 20-02
COMPLIANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE No. 92-02
INVESTMENT ADVISERS COMMITTEE No. 23-02
SEC RULES COMMITTEE No. 86-02
RE: SEC SANCTIONS A FUND AND ITS ADVISER FOR STALE FUND PERFORMANCE
INFORMATION ON THE FUND’S WEBSITE
The Securities and Exchange Commission recently sanctioned a registered investment
company for willfully violating, and its adviser and the sole shareholder of the adviser for
willful aiding and abetting the fund’s violation of, Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933
and Section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act based upon the Commission find that the
fund’s website contained stale performance information.* In particular, the SEC found that the
website advertising the mutual fund prominently proclaimed returns for the fund of 422% from
inception through March 10, 2000. These returns, while factually accurate, were rendered
misleading by the fund’s failure to disclose that between March 10, 2000 and September 30,
2000, the most recent calendar quarter, the returns were only 191%.
In imposing sanctions on the respondents, the Commission’s Order noted that in 1998,
following an examination by the Commission’s staff, the fund had been notified that the
performance results posted on the fund’s website were not current to the most recent calendar
quarter. At the time, the fund’s attorney advised the Commission’s staff that, going forward,
the fund would “at the end of each calendar quarter either remove or update any performance
data on its website.” The Order also noted that, with respect to the 2000 stale performance
information, while other portions of the website had been changed as recently as November
2000, the March 2000 performance information had not been modified.
Based upon its findings, the Commission fined the adviser’s sole shareholder $20,000
and the fund, the adviser, and the adviser’s sole shareholder were required to enter into an
undertaking to:
• Make a written representation to the SEC’s District Office, on a quarterly basis for
the period of five years from the date of the Order, confirming that any and all
websites for any and all series of shares of the fund do not include any performance
* See In re The Thurlow Funds, Inc., Thurlow Capital Management, Inc., and Thomas F. Thurlow, SEC Release No. 33-8136,
IA-2065, IC-25761 (October 2, 2002).
2
history, either graphic or textual. In the alternative, if such performance history is
included on the website, the respondents must retain, for a period of five years, an
independent consultant, not unacceptable to the staff of the Commission, to verify
that any performance figures included in the website are current and in compliance
with the rules and regulations under the Federal securities laws, and to make
quarterly reports concerning those verifications to the staff of the Commission. This
portion of the Order also requires any independent consultant retained by the
respondents to enter into an agreement precluding it from entering into any
employment, consultant, attorney-client, auditing, or other professional relationship
with the respondents, or any of their present or former affiliates, directors, officers,
employees, or agents, acting in their capacity as such, for a period of two years from
completion of the engagement. All firms with which the independent consultant is
affiliated are also precluded from having any other professional relationship with
the respondents or any of their present or former affiliates, directors, officers,
employees or agents unless they first obtain the prior written consent of the SEC’s
District Office;
• Within thirty days of the date of the Order, mail a copy of it, together with a cover
letter in a form not unacceptable to the staff of the Commission, to each of the fund’s
existing shareholders;
• Maintain a link to the Commission’s Order on the home page of any and all websites
for any and all series of shares of the fund, in a form not unacceptable to the staff of
the Commission, for twelve months from the date of the Order; and
• File written verifications with the Commission affirming compliance with these
conditions.
Tamara K. Salmon
Senior Associate Counsel
Latest Comment Letters:
TEST - ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Response to the European Commission on the Savings and Investments Union