san diego securities attorney

Non-Traded Business Development Companies (BDCs) About to Get Even Riskier?

December 17, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

As one of the largest non-traded real estate investment trust (Non-Traded REIT) company, AR Capital, closes shop on new offerings, a growing non-traded product lines up to take retail investor’s money. Enter the non-traded business development company (BDCs). BDCs have been a growing asset class that markets itself to investors as a non-stock market, non-real estate, high yield alternative investment. However, BDCs appear to be just as speculative, suffer from high commissions and fees, and are inappropriate for most investors just like Non-Traded REITs. Indeed, according to a Wealth Management Article front-end load fees on Non-Traded BDCs are typically around 11.5 to 12 percent. In addition, BDCs also usually have an incentive compensation following the “two and twenty” rule where the fund charges two percent of assets in management fees and 20% of capital gains based upon performance.

As we have reported in the past, BDCs make loans to and invest in small to mid-size, developing, or financially troubled companies either broadly or in a particular sector, such as oil and gas. BDCs have stepped into a role that many commercial banks left during the financial crisis due to capital raising requirements. In sum, BDCs lend to companies that may not otherwise get financing from traditional sources. Non-Traded BDCs offer investors similar risks as Non-Traded REITs including higher fees, less liquidity, and less corporate transparency. The major difference is that Non-Traded BDCs are regulated under the 1940 Act that governs mutual funds and that a BDC is valued quarterly.

The largest player in this space is Franklin Square Capital Partners which manages multiple Non-Traded BDC funds including the FS Investment Corporation (FSIC) FS Investment Corporation II (FSIC II), FS Investment Corporation III (FSIC III), FS Investment Corporation IV (FSIC IV), FS Energy and Power Fund (FSEP), and FS Global Credit Opportunities. Franklin Square’s BDC assets were approximately $14.5 billion under management as of March 31, 2015. Other firms seeking to capitalize on the BDC wave including CNL Securities’ Corporate Capital Trust, ICON Investment’s CĪON Investment Corporation fund (CĪON); and American Realty Capital’s Business Development Corporation of America II.

Broker Investigation: VSR Financial Services Advisor Robert Bragg

December 16, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The investment lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints against broker Robert Bragg (Bragg). There are at least 4 customer complaints against Bragg. The customer complaints against Bragg allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, negligence, fraud, 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). Our firm has written numerous times about investor losses in these types of programs such as equipment leasing programs like LEAF Equipment Leasing Income Funds I-IV and ICON Leasing Funds Eleven and Twelve. Investors are destined to lose money in these investments because the 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.

The most recent complaint was filed in February 2015 and alleged unsuitable investments for investments made between 2005 though August 2013 causing $460,488 in damages. Another complaint filed in November 2014 alleged breach of fiduciary duty among other claims for investments made in October 2007 though September 2010 causing $322,432.

Bragg entered the securities industry in March 2004. Since March 2004, Bragg has been registered with VSR Financial Services, Inc. out of the firm’s Colorado Springs, Colorado office location.

FINRA Investigates NMS Capital Advisors Broker Sperry Younger

December 14, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) investigation into broker Sperry Younger (Younger). In addition, there are at least 2 customer complaints against Younger, 6 judgments or liens, one financial matter disclosed. FINRA’s investigation relates to possible violations of NASD Rule 3010 and FINRA Rules 2010. Rule 3010 is FINRA’s rule concerning the industry’s requirement to supervise the activities of brokers. The customer complaints against Younger allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker misappropriated funds and made forged documents among other claims.

According to the disclosures, Younger recently filed for Bankruptcy in August 2015. Prior to bankruptcy filing Younger had a number of tax liens against him including a lien filed on April 2014 $3,037, a civil judgment of $9,678 on January 25, 2013, a civil judgement of $20,001 on July 11, 2012, a civil judgement of $21,890 on April 30, 2012, a civil judgement of $2,667 on March 22, 2012, and a civil judgment of $7,595 on January 10, 2012. A broker with large liens are an important consideration for investors to weigh when dealing with a financial advisor. An advisor may be conflicted to offer high commission investments to customers in order to satisfy liens and debts that may not be in the client’s best interests.

Younger entered the securities industry in January 1996. From May 2006 until May 2010, Younger was associated with Charles Morgan Securities, Inc. From May 2010 until October 2012, Younger was associated with John Carris Investments LLC. Thereafter, from October 2012 until April 2014, Younger was a registered representative of NMS Capital Securities, LLC (NMS). From July 2014 until April 2015, Younger was associated with Rothschild Lieberman LLC. From July 2014 until June 2015, Younger was associated with J. Streicher Capital LLC. From June 2015 until August 2015, Younger was associated with Avenir Financial Group. Finally, since October 2015, Younger has been registered with NMS out of the firm’s New York, New York office location.

Gana LLP Investigation: Customer Complaints Against Howard Slater

December 13, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints against broker Howard Slater (Slater). In addition, The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2015046156301) against Slater. There are at least 18 customer complaints against Slater and 2 regulatory actions. The customer complaints against Slater allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, negligence, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and unauthorized trading among other claims.

The most recent customer complaint was filed in November 2013 and alleges unsuitable investments, fraud, and negligence concerning investments in alternative investments in real estate investments. The complaint seeks $90,000 in damages. In another complaint filed in July 2013, a customer complained that Slater misinformed her regarding the risks of three non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs).

In a FINRA regulatory action against Slater, the agency alleged that in February 2008 and August 2008, Slater sent emails to two customers in connection with their purchases of IMH Secured Loan Fund, LLC (IMH Fund) that contained misrepresentations regarding the features of the IMH Fund. In addition, according to FINRA, in March 2008, Slater sent an email to a customer that contained exaggerated and misleading statements about the safety of the IMH Fund. Finally, FINRA found that in April 2008, Slater caused an SAI customer’s account records to reflect false annual income and net worth information that caused the business records maintained by his firm to be inaccurate.

FINRA Sanctions Braymen, Lambert and Noel Securities and Shannon Braymen Over Private Placement Supervisory Failures

December 9, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2011025610501) against brokerage firm Braymen, Lambert and Noel Securities, Ltd. (BLNS) and the firm’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) Shannon Braymen (Braymen) resulting in a monetary sanction. FINRA’s allegations were that from April 2007 to November 2011 BLNS, acting through Braymen, failed to supervise its private placement securities business and the activities of brokers located in two offices. The firm was also accused of failing to register those two branch office locations. In addition, FINRA found that BLNS failed to conduct or to adequately document branch office inspections, and had inadequate supervisory systems and written supervisory procedures for non-branch office locations. Finally, FINRA found that BLNS and Braymen failed to capture and retain certain email correspondence.

BLNS is a member of FINRA and registered as a broker-dealer since March 2003, as a full-service broker-dealer. BLNS currently employs approximately 24 brokers and operates out of 4 branch offices. The firm conducts a securities business in corporate debt securities, over-the-counter equity securities, US government securities, mutual funds, options, private placements and variable contracts. BLNS is also authorized to underwrite corporate securities, proprietary trading and investment advisory services. Braymen entered the securities industry in February 1995. During Braymen’s career she has obtained various securities licenses and had supervisory responsibility for each of the supervisory areas complained of by FINRA.

FINRA’s findings highlighted supervisory deficiencies in a number of areas. One of FINRA’s findings was that BLNS and two brokers located in an unregistered branch office in San Antonio, Texas participated in nine private placement offerings. BLNS and Braymen were accused of failing to adequately supervise the firm’s participation in these nine offerings. FINRA found that the firm had no documentation of principal review and approval of any of the private placement documents, no documentation that a principal of the firm had conducted due diligence, and no documentation of principal review and approval of customer subscription documents. Review of subscription documents are required to determine the suitability of the investments for customers.

Broker Investigation: Customer Complaints Against Frank Marinelli

December 8, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints against Frank Marinelli (Marinelli). According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Marinelli has been the subject of at least 3 customer complaints, 1 employment termination, 2 judgment or liens, and 1 criminal matter. The customer complaints against Marinelli allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, churning (excessive trading), misrepresentations, negligence, fraud, and unauthorized trading other claims.

The most recent customer complaint was filed in March 2014 and alleges unsuitable investments and churning causing $120,000 in damages. Another complaint filed in March 2012 alleges high pressure sales tactics unauthorized trading and mismanagement of the client’s account leading to $200,000 in damages.

Marinelli also has two liens listed, both filed in 2010 related to taxes. One lien is for $123,240 and the other is for $41,306. A broker with large liens are an important consideration for investors to weigh when dealing with a financial advisor. An advisor may be conflicted to offer high commission investments to customers in order to satisfy liens and debts that may not be in the client’s best interests.

FINRA Sanctions Joseph Daigneault Over False Account Statements

December 7, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2013038133001) against broker Joseph Daigneault (Daigneault) resulting in a monetary sanction and a suspension. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Daigneault has been the subject of at least 1 customer complaint. The customer complaint against Barthole allege unsuitable investments concerning alternative investments and claims $1,000,000 in damages.

FINRA’s findings stated that from October 2005 through September 2013, Daigneault provided consolidated statements to at least eight customers that included misleading information regarding the customers’ financial holdings. According to FINRA, Daigneault manually created the consolidated statements using a spreadsheet program. However, many of the statements that Daigneault created included values for non-traded, illiquid assets that Daigneault listed the value of the customer’s initial investment regardless of the current actual value of the investment. In addition, FINRA found that several statements had a death benefit column where investment values were listed even where the securities in question did not have death benefits.

A consolidated report is a single document that combines financial information regarding a customer’s financial holdings on one statement. Consolidated reports are supplements but do not replace customer account statements. Due to the increasing complexity of investments offered by brokers from multiple different issuers and platform FINRA issued Regulatory Notice 10-19 reminding brokers and brokerage firms that consolidated report are communications with the public that must be must be clear, accurate, and not misleading. The valuations and values provided on the statements must be consistent with the customer’s official account statement. When creating consolidated account statements broker must take reasonable steps to accurately report information.

FINRA Sanctions Daniel Barthole Over Attempt to Privately Settle a Customer Complaint

December 7, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2012034393401) against broker Daniel Barthole (Barthole) resulting in a monetary sanction and a suspension. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Barthole has been the subject of at least 2 customer complaints. The customer complaints against Barthole allege unsuitable investments, churning (excessive trading), misrepresentations, fraud, and unauthorized trading among other claims. The most recent complaint against Barthole alleged $227,632 in damages concerning unauthorized ETF trading and churning from February 2012 through September 2014. The claim was later withdrawn.

FINRA’s findings stated that Barthole consented to a finding that he together with two other brokers attempted to settle a customer complaint away from their brokerage firm by agreeing to pay $4,000 to a customer and by sending $1,500 in cash to the customer.

Barthole entered the securities industry in 2009. From April 2009 until February 2015, Barthole was associated with Woodstock Financial Group, Inc. Since February 2015, Barthole has been registered with National Securities Corporation out of the firm’s New York, New York office location.

FINRA Sanctions David Khezri Over Unauthorized Trading

December 4, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2015044589701) against broker David Khezri (Khezri) resulting in a monetary sanction and suspension. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Khezri has been the subject of at least 1 customer complaint. The customer complaints against Khezri alleges excessive trading among other claims.

FINRA’s findings stated that Khezri consented to sanctions that he improperly exercised discretion by effecting around 100 trades for six customers without obtaining written authorization from the customers. The firm also did not accept the accounts as discretionary. FINRA alleged that Khezri exercised discretion by executing trades days after his customers provided him oral authority. However, FINRA found that Khezri’s firm did not permit discretionary trading except for registered investment advisors (RIA) trading in the accounts of their advisory clients and Khezri was not an RIA.

Advisors are not allowed to engage in unauthorized trading. Such trading occurs when a broker sells securities without the prior authority from the investor. All brokers are under an obligation to first discuss trades with the investor before executing them under NYSE Rule 408(a) and FINRA Rules 2510(b). These rules explicitly prohibit brokers from making discretionary trades in a customers’ non-discretionary accounts. The SEC has also found that unauthorized trading to be fraudulent nature because no disclosure could be more important to an investor than to be made aware that a trade will take place.

FINRA Bars Broker Jeffrey Snyder Over Failure to Respond to Regulator Requests

December 3, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought and enforcement action (FINRA No. 2015045289901) against broker Jeffrey Snyder (Snyder) resulting a permanent bar from the securities industry. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Snyder has been the subject of at least 6 customer complaints, and 1 regulatory event. The customer complaints against Snyder allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, engaged in churning (excessive trading), misrepresentations, negligence, fraud, and unauthorized trading other claims.

FINRA’s findings stated that although Snyder appeared for an on-the-record interview, he refused to respond to certain questions concerning allegations that he paid a customer compensation for investment losses without the knowledge or authorization of his member firm. Snyder’s refusal resulted in an automatic bar.

An examination of Snyder’s employment history reveals that Snyder moves from troubled firm to troubled firm. The pattern of brokers moving in this way is sometimes called “cockroaching” within the industry. See More Than 5,000 Stockbrokers From Expelled Firms Still Selling Securities, The Wall Street Journal, (Oct. 4, 2013). In Snyder’s 12 year career he has worked at 6 different firms. Snyder entered the securities industry in 2003. From February 2006, through June 2008, Snyder was associated with New Castle Financial Services LLC. Thereafter from June 2008 until August 2008, Snyder was a registered representative of The Concord Equity Group, LLC. From August 2008, until April 2012, Snyder was registered with Spartan Capital Securities, LLC. From April 2012 until April 2015, Snyder was associated with Rockwell Global Capital LLC. Finally, in March 2015, Snyder was registered with Network 1 Financial Securities Inc. until September 2015 out of the firm’s Danbury, Connecticut office location.