SEC v. Rand Heckler (2023)
Settled
Checked against the primary document on October 3, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.
In September 2023 the SEC announced a settlement with Rand Heckler. The Commission barred Heckler from the securities industry by consent after a 2023 federal injunction and a New York guilty plea. The underlying complaint alleged he misappropriated most of $755,000 from an investor in a sham hedge fund; one investor's $100,000 was used for the first investor's redemption, described as Ponzi-like, which is a minor part of the findings.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 3-21660 |
| Date filed | 2023-09-13 |
| Date resolved | 2023-09-13 |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | bonds, equities |
| Criminal parallel | Yes: guilty plea (Rand Heckler (not yet sentenced when the order was issued; state prosecution)), New York Supreme Court, Nassau County, 2023-04-21 |
| Bars imposed | registration bar |
| Defendants | Rand Heckler |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Advisers Act s.206 ; Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on September 13, 2023 as release 3-21660. The Commission barred Heckler from the securities industry by consent after a 2023 federal injunction and a New York guilty plea. The underlying complaint alleged he misappropriated most of $755,000 from an investor in a sham hedge fund; one investor's $100,000 was used for the first investor's redemption, described as Ponzi-like, which is a minor part of the findings.
This library does not tag the matter as a Ponzi scheme: on a source check, the document mentions Ponzi-like payments only in passing, or as part of another party's scheme, and the charges are about something else. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.
Non-monetary relief recorded: registration bar.
A parallel criminal proceeding is referenced. Civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.
Timeline
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.