Since when did "Concerns" become "for cause". For cause sounds like language used when terminating an employee. You make it sound like a cause of action in a lawsuit. "Concerns" are far less weighty than "probable cause." There is no law suit and as an example of proving that the SEC does not typically suspend for fraud is seen in the fact that only a tiny percentage of non reporting suspensions result in actual filing of lawsuits by the SEC. Just look and you will see most of the lawsuits are against individuals and brokerage firms and very few against suspended companies.
The strange thing is that many of the lawsuits against OTC companies for fraud do not involve first or later suspending the stock. Can you explain that one?
Are you saying the SEC let off the hook all those thousands of companies involved in fraud, which is "proven" to be fraud by your logic because they were suspended?
"Questions" or Concerns are exactly that, only questions or concerns, NOT FACTS that can be litigated. Although getting those concerns or questions answered may or may not result in legal actions, they could just as likely resolve the matter amicably. And that may be why there are so few legal actions taken against stock companies that have been suspended. Even lawsuits against those involved in suspended stocks is rather rare.
These are the actual reasons the SEC gives for suspending stocks on their own web site and i see plenty of things that do not necessarily involve fraud:
A lack of current, accurate, or adequate information about the company, for example, when a company is not current in its filings of periodic reports;
Questions about the accuracy of publicly available information, including in company press releases and reports, about the company’s current operational status, financial condition, or business transactions;
Questions about trading in the stock, including trading by insiders, potential market manipulation, and the ability to clear and settle transactions in the stock.
