Tenants-in-Common

Broker Investigation: TIC Complaints Against Sigma Financial Broker Tomas Velken

December 28, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The investment attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are interested in speaking with investors of broker Tomas Velken (Velken). According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Velken has been the subject of at least 14 customer complaints. The customer complaints against Velken allege securities law violations that including unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims. Many of the complaints appear to be in connection with in connection with the sales of tenants-in-common (TICs).

The most recent complaint was filed in September 2015, and alleged $115,000 in losses due to a recommendation to invest in a real estate security transaction purchased in 2007. Another investor in April 2015, claimed $1,777,484 in damages due to a real estate security transactions purchased from 2005 through 2007. In March 2015, another investor alleged that in 2010 the broker made misrepresentations concerning an investment’s performance and claimed damages of $592,600.

As a background, TICs largely been sold unfairly as tax advantaged products that allow customers to defer capital gains taxes on appreciated real estate. TICs are private placements that have no secondary trading market and are therefore illiquid investments. In a typical TIC, the investor receives a fractional interest in the property along with other stakeholders and the profits are generated mostly through the efforts of the sponsor and the management company that manages and leases the property. The sponsor typically structures the TIC investment with up-front fees and expenses charged to the TIC and negotiates the sale price and loan for the acquired property. Because these fees are often higher than 15%, there is often no way for the investment to be profitable for the investor.

Joseph Sturniolo Wipes Investor Complaints From Record Using FINRA’s Flawed Expungement Process

December 14, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

Recently, Joseph Sturniolo’s (Sturniolo) attorney reached out to our firm to inform us that our post on Sturniolo was inaccurate. The post detailed that Sturniolo had been subject to at least eight customer complaints and that the many of these complaints involved the recommendation of unsuitable and misrepresented recommendations concerning tenants-in-common (TICs).

The post also detailed how TICs have virtually disappeared as an investment option because they are almost always unsuitable. According to InvestmentNews “At the height of the TIC market in 2006, 71 sponsors raised $3.65 billion in equity from TICs and DSTs…TICs now are all but extinct because of the fallout from the credit crisis.” In fact, TICs recommendations have been a major contributor to bankrupting brokerage firms. For example, 43 of the 92 broker-dealers that sold TICs sponsored by DBSI Inc., a company whose executives were later charged with running a Ponzi scheme, a staggering 47% of firms that sold DBSI are no longer in business.

TIC investments entail significant risks. A TIC investor runs the risk of holding the property for a significant amount of time and that subsequent sales of the property may occur at a discount to the value of the real property interest. FINRA has also warned that the fees and expenses associated with TICs, including sponsor costs, can, and in our opinion, do outweigh the any potential tax benefits associated with a Section 1031 Exchange. That is, the TIC product itself may be a defective product because its costs outweigh any potential investment value or tax benefit offered to the customer.

Sturniolo’s attorney has brought it to our attention that Sturniolo has succeeded in using FINRA’s flawed expungement process system to remove five complaints from his BrokerCheck record. Sturniolo’s “award” does not even detail how much Sturniolo’s employer paid to settle all of the claims. As shown in Sturniolo’s expungement award Sturniolo’s sued his own employer, Geneos Wealth Management, Inc. (Geneos Wealth) for damages of $1.00 due to the placement on his record of five customer complaints. The “hearing” that took place appears to have been perfunctory at best. The hearing concerning five customer complaints was stretched out over a one year period of time in which the arbitrator participated in four hearing sessions on non-consecutive days. Usually there are two hearing sessions a day – meaning in this case the five cases were heard on four half-day hearings stretched out over the course of a full year. The total cost to Sturniolo by FINRA to expunge five customer complaints from his record was $250 – excluding any fees he privately paid his counsel.

Broker Spotlight: Customer Complaints Against Advisor Kenneth Bolton

November 22, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are interested in speaking with investors of broker Kenneth Bolton. According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Kenneth Bolton (Bolton) has been the subject of at least 10 customer complaints, and 1 regulatory action, and one employment separation for cause. The customer complaints against Bolton allege securities law violations that including unsuitable investments, fraud, misrepresentations, failure to perform due diligence, violation of federal and state securities laws, and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims.

The most recent complaint was filed in January 2015, and alleged $413,000 in losses due to an unsuitable investment strategy. Another investor in May 2014, claimed $2,700,000 in damages. Some of the customer complaints appear to be in connection with in connection with the sales of tenants-in-common (TICs).

Bolton entered the securities industry in 1983. From March 1995, until August 2007, Bolton was associated with First Montauk Securities Corp. From August 2007, until December 2009, Bolton was associated with National Securities Corporation. Presently, Bolton is associated with Sandlapper Securities, LLC out of the firm’s Greenville, South Carolina branch office location.

Customers File Complaints Against Eric Wegner Over Tenants-in-Common (TIC) Real Estate Investments

October 26, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Eric Wegner (Wegner) has been the subject of at least 5 customer complaints and two financial disclosures. Customers have filed complaints against Wegner alleging a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, breach of fiduciary duty, and false statements mostly in connection with recommendations to invest in private placements such as tenants-in-common (TICs) interests. In addition, one complaint involves a dispute over a variable annuity recommendation.

Wegner entered the securities industry in 2000. From December 2002, until December 2008, Wegner was a registered representative with Sammons Securities Company, LLC. Thereafter, from January 2009, until February 2011, Wegner was associated with QA3 Financial Corp. From February 2011, until July 2013, Wegner was associated with Sigma Financial Corporation. Finally, Wegner is currently a registered representative with Cambridge Investment Research, Inc. out of the firm’s Delafield, Wisconsin office location.

TIC investments have led to devastating investor losses and are in almost all cases unsuitable products. The near certainty of failure of investing in TICs as a whole has led to the product virtually disappearing as an offered investment from most reputable brokerage firms. According to InvestmentNews “At the height of the TIC market in 2006, 71 sponsors raised $3.65 billion in equity from TICs and DSTs…TICs now are all but extinct because of the fallout from the credit crisis.” In fact, TICs recommendations have been a major contributor to bankrupting brokerage firms. For example, 43 of the 92 broker-dealers that sold TICs sponsored by DBSI Inc., a company whose executives were later charged with running a Ponzi scheme, a staggering 47% of firms that sold DBSI are no longer in business.

Broker Investigation: Robert Horning’s Sale of Tenants-in-Common (TIC) Real Estate Investments

October 20, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Robert Horning (Horning) has been the subject of at least 8 customer complaints. Customers have filed complaints against Horning alleging a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and false statements in connection with recommendations to invest in private placements such as tenants-in-common (TICs) interests, direct participation programs and limited partnerships which include investments like oil & gas, non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs), and equipment leasing programs.

Horning entered the securities industry in 1993. From November 2004, until July 2009, Horning was a registered representative with Direct Capital Securities, Inc. Thereafter, since July 2009, Horning has been associated with Centaurus Financial, Inc. (Centaurus) out of the firm’s Los Angeles, California office location.

TIC investments have come under fire by many investors. Indeed, due to the failure of the TIC investment strategy as a whole across the securities industry, TIC investments have virtually disappeared as offered investments. According to InvestmentNews “At the height of the TIC market in 2006, 71 sponsors raised $3.65 billion in equity from TICs and DSTs…TICs now are all but extinct because of the fallout from the credit crisis.” In fact, TICs recommendations have been a major contributor to bankrupting brokerage firms. For example, 43 of the 92 broker-dealers that sold TICs sponsored by DBSI Inc., a company whose executives were later charged with running a Ponzi scheme, a staggering 47% of firms that sold DBSI are no longer in business.

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.

Broker Spotlight: TIC Customer Complaints Against John Notman

August 27, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker John Notman (Notman) has been the subject to an astonishing 31 customer complaints along with two firm terminations for cause. The customer complaints against Notman allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments and misrepresentations and false statements among other claims. Many of the complaints involve Notman’s sales of tenants-in-common (TICs). These claims along alleged combined investor losses of well over $20,000,000.

Notman entered the securities industry in 1982. From March 2003, until September 2012, Notman was registered with Berthel, Fisher & Company Financial Services, Inc (Berthel Fisher). In September 2012, Berthel Fisher filed a notice of termination Form U-5 stating that the reason for terminating Notman from the firm was due to his failure to report certain financial disclosures.

As a background, TICs largely been sold unfairly as tax advantaged products that allow customers to defer capital gains taxes on appreciated real estate. TICs are private placements that have no secondary trading market and are therefore illiquid investments. In a typical TIC, the investor receives a fractional interest in the property along with other stakeholders and the profits are generated mostly through the efforts of the sponsor and the management company that manages and leases the property. The sponsor typically structures the TIC investment with up-front fees and expenses charged to the TIC and negotiates the sale price and loan for the acquired property. Because these fees are often higher than 15%, there is often no way for the investment to be profitable for the investor.

Broker Spotlight: TIC Customer Complaints Against Mark Kosanke

August 26, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Mark Kosanke (Kosanke) has been the subject of at least two customer complaints. The customer complaints against Kosanke allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments and misrepresentations and false statements among other claims. The securities involved in the customer disputes are tenants-in-common (TICs).

Kosanke entered the securities industry in 1994. From 2000, until July 2006, Kosanke was registered with Questar Capital Corporation. From July 2006, until August 2010, Kosanke was associated with Professional Asset Management, Inc. Thereafter, from August 2010, Kosanke was registered with brokerage firm Concorde Investment Services, LLC.

As a background, TICs largely been sold unfairly as tax advantaged products that allow customers to defer capital gains taxes on appreciated real estate. TICs are private placements that have no secondary trading market and are therefore illiquid investments. In a typical TIC, the investor receives a fractional interest in the property along with other stakeholders and the profits are generated mostly through the efforts of the sponsor and the management company that manages and leases the property. The sponsor typically structures the TIC investment with up-front fees and expenses charged to the TIC and negotiates the sale price and loan for the acquired property. Because these fees are often higher than 15%, there is often no way for the investment to be profitable for the investor.

Broker Spotlight: TIC Customer Complaints Against Robert “Rusty” Tweed

August 25, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Robert “Rusty” Tweed (Tweed) has been the subject of at least 8 customer complaints and one termination from a brokerage firm for cause. The customer complaints against Tweed allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentations and false statements, and securities fraud, among other claims. The securities involved in the customer disputes include private placements, tenants-in-common (TICs), and variable annuities.

Tweed entered the securities industry in 1993. From February 2005, until February 2007, Tweed was registered with United Securities Alliance, Inc. From February 2007, until October 2010, Tweed was associated with CapWest Securities, Inc. (CapWest) Thereafter, from August 2010, until April 2011, Tweed was registered with brokerage firm MAM Securities, LLC. Tweed went back to CapWest from April 2011, until August 2011. Finally, Tweed has been registered with Concorde Investment Services, LLC since August 2011.

In addition to Tweed’s registrations, his BrokerCheck records reveal a number of other business ventures that Tweed is involved with including Tweed Financial Services, the Exeter Group LLC, Athenian Fund, LLC, Waterloo LLC, TFS Properties, Inc., Starpoint Energy, LLC, Tweed Marketing Services, LLC, and Tax Guard 1031.

Broker Investigation: Fera Shivaee’s Sale of Tenants-in-Common (TIC) Real Estate Investments

July 20, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Fera Shivaee (Shivaee) has been the subject of at least two customer complaints. Customers have filed complaints against Shivaee alleging a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, misrepresentations and false statements in connection with recommendations to invest in private placements such as tenants-in-common (TICs) interests.

Shivaee has been a registered representative with Centaurus Financial, Inc. (Centaurus) since 1997. According to FINRA records three TICs complained of include NNN River Exchange, NNN Plantations, and CORE Minneapolis.

TIC investments have come under fire by many investors. Indeed, due to the failure of the TIC investment strategy as a whole across the securities industry, TIC investments have virtually disappeared as offered investments. According to InvestmentNews “At the height of the TIC market in 2006, 71 sponsors raised $3.65 billion in equity from TICs and DSTs…TICs now are all but extinct because of the fallout from the credit crisis.” In fact, TICs recommendations have been a major contributor to bankrupting brokerage firms. For example, 43 of the 92 broker-dealers that sold TICs sponsored by DBSI Inc., a company whose executives were later charged with running a Ponzi scheme, a staggering 47% of firms that sold DBSI are no longer in business.