REITs

Former H. Beck Broker Richard Poston Under FINRA Investigation Over Sales Practices

September 8, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

The securities fraud lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints and regulatory actions filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) against broker Richard Poston (Poston). According to BrokerCheck records, Poston has spent 20 years in the securities industry and was most recently registered with H. Beck, Inc. (H. Beck) in Plano, Texas. Poston is currently not licensed to act as a broker or an investment adviser. Over his career, Poston has been the subject of at least four customer complaints, one regulatory investigation, one employment separation for cause, and one bankruptcy.

The most recent regulatory investigation was filed in December 2015 by FINRA alleging potential violations of FINRA Rules 2010, 2150, 3240, and 8210. These rules revolve around standards of commercial honor and equitable principles of trade, improper use of customers’ securities or funds, the borrowing or lending money from or to any customer without written approval.

The most recent complaint was filed in March 2016 while employed at H. Beck alleging that Poston, from October 2007, until September 2015 made unsuitable concentrated and illiquid investments in non-traded REIT’s. The claim is currently pending.

Customers File Complaints Against VSR Financial Broker Robert Wamhoff

May 20, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Robert Wamhoff (Wamhoff). According to BrokerCheck records Van Patter has been subject to at least seven customer complaints. The customer complaints against Wamhoff allege securities law violations that including unsuitable investments and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims. Many of the complaints involve direct participation products (DPPs), variable annuities, non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), and other alternative investments.

Our firm has represented many clients in these types of products. All of these investments come with high costs and historically have underperformed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds. For example, products like oil and gas partnerships, REITs, and other alternative investments are only appropriate for a narrow band of investors under certain conditions due to the high costs, illiquidity, and huge redemption charges of the products, if they can be redeemed. However, due to the high commissions brokers earn on these products they sell them to investors who cannot profit from them. Further, investor often fail to understand that they have lost money until many years after agreeing to the investment. In sum, for all of their costs and risks, investors in these programs are in no way additionally compensated for the loss of liquidity, risks, or cost.

Brokers have a responsibility treat investors fairly which includes obligations such as making only suitable investments for the client. In order to make a suitable recommendation the broker must meet certain requirements. First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation and due diligence into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. Second, the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives such as the client’s retirement status, long or short term goals, age, disability, income needs, or any other relevant factor.

Broker Investigation: Customer Complaints Against VSR Financial Broker Mickey Long

March 28, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Mickey Long (Long). According to BrokerCheck records Long is subject to nine customer complaints. The customer complaints against Long allege securities law violations that including unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims. The claims appear to relate to allegations regard direct participation products and limited partnerships such as equipment leasing and non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs). Other products complained of include oil and gas private placements.

Our firm has represented many clients in these types of products. All of these investments come with high costs and historically have under performed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds. For example, investors are destined to lose money in equipment leasing programs like LEAF Equipment Leasing Income Funds I-IV and ICON Leasing Funds Eleven and Twelve. The high costs and fees associated with these investments make significant returns virtual impossibility. Yet for all of their costs investors are in no way compensated for the additional risks of these products.

Brokers have a responsibility treat investors fairly which includes obligations such as making only suitable investments for the client. In order to make a suitable recommendation the broker must meet certain requirements. First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation and due diligence into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. Second, the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives such as the client’s retirement status, long or short term goals, age, disability, income needs, or any other relevant factor.

Recovery Options for VFG Securities Clients Invested in Non-Traded REITs, Equipment Leasing, Oil & Gas, and Other Alternative Investments

March 20, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating a complaint filed by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against brokerage firm VFG Securities, Inc. (VFG) and its CEO Jason Vanclef (Vanclef) (FINRA No. 2013038283001). The complaint alleges that approximately 95 percent of VFG’s revenue was obtained from the sale of non-traded direct participation products (DPPs) and non-traded REITs and other alternative investments such as equipment leasing programs and oil & gas private placements between approximately November 2010 and June 2012. Even though alternative investments are highly speculative and illiquid investments that have little to no place in the average investor’s portfolio, FINRA alleged that VFG failed to reasonably supervise the sale of illiquid alternative investments, including non-traded DPPs and non-traded REITs, to ensure that customers did not become overly concentrated in these products.

According to FINRA, VFG’s alternative investment strategy comes from a book distributed by the firm to customers and authored by Vanclef entitled Wealth Code: How the Rich Stay Rich in Good Times and Bad (The Wealth Code). FINRA found that Vanclef used The Wealth Code as sales literature to promote investments in non-traded DPPs and non-traded REITs, and to lure potential investors to VFG. FINRA claims that Vanclef repeatedly claimed in The Wealth Code that non-traded DPPs and non-traded REITs offer both high return and capital preservation among other claims. However, FINRA has found that the these claims are false, inaccurate, misleading, and contradicted information provided in the prospectuses of the products that Vanclef and VFG sold.

FINRA stated that non-traded DPPs and non-traded REITs are speculative investments that contain a high degree of risk, including the risk that an investor may lose a substantial portion or all of his or her initial investment. Yet, Vanclef claimed in The Wealth Code that by investing in “real” or “tangible” assets and other instruments that he recommended, investors could “reasonably achieve 8-12% results,” on their investments and “get consistent returns” that provided “piece [sic] of mind.”

Investors File Non-Traded REIT Complaints Against Broker Nancy Daoud

February 11, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Nancy Daoud (Daoud). According to BrokerCheck records Daoud is subject to 6 customer complaints. The customer complaints against Daoud allege securities law violations that including unsuitable investments and misrepresentations among other claims. Many of the most recent claims involve allegations concerning non traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs) and business development companies (BDCs).

As a background since the mid-2000s Non-Traded REITs became one of Wall Street’s hottest products. However, the failure of Non-Traded REITs to perform as well as their publicly traded counterparts has called into question if Non-Traded REITs should be sold at all and if so should there be a limit on the amount a broker can recommend. See Controversy Over Non-Traded REITs: Should These Products Be Sold to Investors? Part I

Non-Traded REITs are securities that invest in different types of real estate assets such as commercial, residential, or other specialty niche real estate markets such as strip malls, hotels, storage, and other industries. Non-traded REITs are sold only through broker-dealers, are illiquid, have no or limited secondary market and redemption options, and can only be liquidated on terms dictated by the issuer, which may be changed at any time and without prior warning.

Recovery Options for United Development Funding Investors

January 25, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating investors that were recommended to invest in non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs) or publicly traded shares of United Development Funding (UDF) funds. Based upon the investor’s investment objectives and other information such investments may have been unsuitable for the investor. Recently, UDF IV, a publicly traded REIT, plummeted about 50% in value after allegations arose claiming that UDF runs its REIT programs like a Ponzi scheme.

As a background, according to UDF’s website the company was founded in 2003 and purports to provide investors with an opportunity to diversify their portfolios with “fundamentally sound investments in affordable residential real estate.”

However, allegations have been made that UDF IV made false or misleading statements and omissions about its business. It has been alleged that UDF IV failed to disclose that: (1) subsequent UDF REIT companies provide significant liquidity and capital to earlier UDF companies which allows those companies to repay earlier investors; (2) if funding from retail investors to the latest UDF company were halted the earlier UDF companies would not be capable of continuing operations; (3) UDF IV provided liquidity to UDF I, UMT and UDF III, as part of an investment scheme; (4) UDF IV was being operated in a manner similar to a Ponzi scheme where new capital is being used to pay prior investors; (5) UDF IV failed to disclose that the company was being investigated by the SEC for its practices; and (6) UDF IV’s business prospect representations were false and misleading.

Customers File Dozens of Complaints Against Broker John Schooler

October 16, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker John Schooler (Schooler) has been hit with at least 26 customer complaints over his career. Customers have filed complaints against Schooler alleging securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, negligence, misrepresentations, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of blue sky statutes in several states, and fraud among other claims. The claims against Schooler involve various types of securities including private placements, direct participation programs and limited partnerships which include investments like oil & gas, non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs), equipment leasing programs, and tenants-in-common (TICs). The majority these products are high commission based products that often pay broker commission of between 7-10%. As the research now shows these products are arguably always unsuitable for investors because they do not compensate investors for their substantial risks. See Controversy Over Non-Traded REITs: Should These Products Be Sold to Investors? Part II

Schooler entered the securities industry in 1993. From 1994, until July 2011, Schooler was associated with WFP Securities. From June 2011, until July 2011, Schooler became associated with JRL Capital Corporation. Finally, Since July 2011, Schooler has been associated with First Financial Equity Corporation out of the firm’s Scottdale, Arizona office location.

As a background, a Non-Traded REIT is a security that invests in different types of real estate assets such as commercial, residential, or other specialty niche real estate markets such as strip malls, hotels, storage, and other industries. There are publicly traded REITs that are bought and sold on an exchange with similar liquidity to traditional assets like stocks and bonds. However, Non-traded REITs are sold only through broker-dealers, are illiquid, have no or limited secondary market and redemption options, and can only be liquidated on terms dictated by the issuer, which may be changed at any time and without prior warning.

SEC Approves Changes to Value of Non-Traded REITs on Account Statements

November 6, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved a rule change proposed by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) that will give investors greater insight into the costs of purchasing shares of non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs).

As reported by InvestmentNews, the SEC approved FINRA’s proposal on October 10. The rule change would require broker-dealers to include a per-share estimated value for an unlisted direct participation program (DPP) or a REIT on customer statements in addition to other related disclosures. The current practice is to list the value of Non-Traded REITs at a per-share price of $10, or simply the purchase price of the investment.

As a background, a Non-Traded REIT is a security that invests in different types of real estate assets such as commercial real estate properties, residential mortgages of various types, or other specialty niche real estate markets such as strip malls, hotels, and other industries. REITs can be publicly traded and when they are, can be bought and sold on an exchange with similar liquidity to traditional assets like stocks and bonds. However, Non-traded REITs are sold only through broker-dealers and are illiquid, have no market, and can only be liquidated on terms dictated by the issuer, which may be changed at any time and without prior warning.

Brokerage Firms Halt Sales of American Realty Capital Related REITs

November 4, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

According to InvestmentNews, recently several brokerage firms including Securities America Inc., with 1,772 registered reps and advisers, and the four National Planning Holdings Inc. firms with 3,954 registered reps and advisers including INVEST Financial Corp., Investment Centers of America Inc., National Planning Corp., and SII Investments Inc., announced that they are temporarily suspending some or all of the non-traded real estate investment trust (Non-Traded REITs) sales sponsored or distributed by American Realty Capital and its affiliated companies.

These Non-Traded REITs include investments such as the Phillips Edison-ARC Grocery Center REIT II and Cole Capital Properties V. The decision to halt sales come as Nicholas Schorsch, ARC’s chairman, faces further investigation after it had been revealed that the traded REIT he controls, American Realty Capital Properties Inc., made a $23 million accounting error that resulted in the firing of its chief financial officer.

The firms halted the sales in order to conduct further due diligence on the Non-Traded REIT products. Suspending sales of these products will likely help protect the firms if it is later revealed that the irregularities are more widespread. Brokers have a duty to have a reasonable basis for recommending that Non-Traded REITs are suitable for investors. This means that the firm has investigated the product and believes that the information disclosed to investors has a factual basis. If a Non-Traded REIT, its parent company, or principals are under investigation for making material misstatements it would be difficult for the firm to later argue that it had a basis for believing that the information it provided to investors was accurate.

Non-Traded REITs Sales Grow As Shown in Second Quarter 2014 Rankings

October 21, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Since the financial crisis the non-traded real estate investment trust (REIT) market has been a financial boon for the brokerage industry. A REIT is a security that invests typically in real estate related assets. Generally, REITs can be publicly or privately held. While publicly held REITs can be sold on an exchange, are liquid, and have lower commissions and fees, non-traded REITs are sold are private, are speculative, illiquid, and often charge fees of over 10%. Nonetheless, non-traded REITs have become a darling product of the financial industry, mostly because of the fat fees brokers earn for recommending these speculative products.

Brokers selling these products sometimes claim that non-traded REITs offer stable returns compared to the volatile stock market. As the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) have recently noted, these products may not be as safe and stabile as advertised.

InvestmentNews recently ranked non listed REITs by second quarter 2014 invested assets. As shown below, investment in these funds are substantial and continues to grow each quarter

Company	2Q invested assets ($M)	Original share price	Current share value	Original distribution rate	Current distribution rate	2Q14 FFO 2 payout ratio
Inland American Real Estate Trust	$10,128.5	$10	$6.94	6.20%	5.00%	75%
Corporate Property Associates 17 Global	$4,564.7	$10	$9.50	6.50%	6.50%	81%
Apple Hospitality	$3,960.0	$11	$10.10	8.00%	7.25%	83%
Industrial Income Trust	$3,747.6	$10	$10.40	6.00%	6.00%	100%
Tier REIT	$3,455.8	$10	$4.20	7.00%	0.00%	N/A
CNL Lifestyle Properties	$3,343.4	$10	$6.85	6.25%	4.25%	108%
Griffin-American Healthcare REIT II	$3,056.2	$10	$10.22	6.50%	6.65%	143%
Monogram Residential Trust	$2,879.1	$10	$10.03	7.00%	3.50%	189%
Cole Credit Property Trust IV	$2,833.0	$10	$10.00	6.25%	6.25%	145%
KBS Real Estate Investment Trust II	$2,714.1	$10	$10.29	6.50%	6.50%	98%
Cole Corporate Income Trust	$2,606.3	$10	$10.00	6.50%	6.50%	94%
Hines Real Estate Investment Trust	$2,422.1	$10	$6.40	6.00%	2.90%	88%
American Realty Capital Trust V	$2,233.5	$25	$25.00	6.60%	6.60%	86%
KBS Real Estate Investment Trust	$2,058.0	$10	$4.45	7.00%	0.00%	N/A
Landmark Apartment Trust	$1,889.4	$10	$8.15	6.00%	3.00%	38%
Phillips Edison – ARC Shopping Center	$1,846.9	$10	$10.00	6.50%	6.70%	129%
Steadfast Income REIT	$1,592.7	$10	$10.24	7.00%	7.00%	165%
Strategic Storage Trust	$731.5	$10	$10.79	7.00%	6.50%	120%
Signature Office	$676.4	$25	$25.00	6.00%	6.00%	83%
Lightstone Value Plus REIT	$643.2	$10	$11.80	7.00%	7.00%	69%

Many brokerage firms have come under fire for their non-traded REIT sales practices. For instance LPL Financial in particular has been accused by several regulators of failing to reign in their broker’s sales practices concerning alternative investments. On March 24, 2014, LPL Financial was fined $950,000 by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) for failing to supervise its brokers’ marketing of nontraditional investments. LPL Financial was alleged to have deficient supervision in the sale of certain alternative investment products, including REITs, oil and gas partnerships, business development companies (BDC’s), hedge funds, and managed futures.

LPL Financial also paid a $500,000 fine to the Massachusetts Securities Division and was ordered to pay $4.8 million in restitution for supervisory and suitability related violations concerning non-traded REITs. In total six firms paid $11 million in restitution and fines related to REIT sales. The other firms including Ameriprise Financial Inc., Lincoln National, Commonwealth Financial Network, Royal Alliance Associates, and Securities America.

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are experienced in representing investors to recover their financial losses through the misrepresentation of non-traded REITs. Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.