Articles Tagged with Non-Traded Reits

shutterstock_180341738According 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.

shutterstock_20354398According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Brian Folland (Folland) has been hit with at least 30 customer complaints over his career and two tax liens. Customers have filed complaints against Folland 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 Folland 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. In addition, in July 2012, Folland disclosed a tax lien of $334,995 owed. Tax liens of that size provide an incentive and conflict of interest in the recommendation of high commission based products such as private placements and direct participation programs that often pay commission between 7-10%.

Folland entered the securities industry in 1995. From July 2007 until May 2013, Folland was associated with brokerage firm National Securities Corporation (National Securities) out of the firm’s Fresno, California office location.

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. In order to make suitable recommendations the broker must have a reasonable basis for recommending the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation of the investments properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. In addition, the broker must also understand the customer’s specific investment objectives to determine whether or not the specific product or security being recommended is appropriate for the customer based upon their needs.

shutterstock_24531604According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Jerry McCutchen (McCutchen) has been the subject of at least 15 customer complaints and one judgment or lien. The customer complaints against McCutchen allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, negligence, and misrepresentations among other claims.

The claims against McCutchen involve various investments including equipment leasing, non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs), and variable annuities. We have written many times about the investing dangers of these products. One quality all of these investments have in common is the fact that they come with high commissions for the broker and low probability of success for the client. Our firm has written numerous times about investor losses in these programs such as equipment leasing programs like LEAF Equipment Leasing Income Funds I-IV and ICON Leasing Funds Eleven and Twelve. The costs and fees associated with all of these investments cause the security to be so costly that significant returns are virtual impossibility. Yet, investors are in no way compensated for the additional risks of these products.

In a typical equipment leasing program upfront fees are around 20-25% of investor’s capital. As for Non-Traded REITs, it was reported in the Wall Street Journal, that a study on “Nontraded REITs are costing investors, especially elderly, retired, unsophisticated investors, billions. They’re suffering illiquidity and ignorance, and earning much less than what they ought to be earning.” In conclusion, “No brokerage should be allowed to sell these things.”

shutterstock_27710896This post continues our investigation into whether or not brokerage firms have a basis to continue to sell non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs). Non-Traded REIT sales have exploded becoming the latest it product of Wall Street. However, experts and regulators have begun to question the basis for selling these products. And if Non-Traded REITs are to be sold, should there be a limit on the amount a broker can recommend.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, Craig McCann, president of Securities Litigation & Consulting Group, a research and consulting company, “Nontraded REITs are costing investors, especially elderly, retired, unsophisticated investors, billions. They’re suffering illiquidity and ignorance, and earning much less than what they ought to be earning.” In conclusion, “No brokerage should be allowed to sell these things.”

According to his analysis, shareholders have lost about $50 billion for having put money into Non-Traded REITs rather than publicly exchange-traded funds. The data comes from a study of the difference between the performance of more than 80 Non-Traded REITs and the performance of a diversified portfolio of traded REITs over two decades. The study found that the average annual rate of return of Non-Traded REITs was 5.2%, compared with 11.9% for the Vanguard REIT Index Fund.

shutterstock_112362875As longtime readers of our blog know we have reported numerous instances of sales and other practice violations regarding how brokers and brokerage firms sell non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs). See list of articles below. As Non-Traded REITs have become the latest darling product of the financial industry experts and regulators have begun to question the basis for selling these products. And if Non-Traded REITs are to be sold, should there be a limit on the amount a broker can recommend.

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.

Investors are also often ignorant to several other facts that would warn against investing in Non-Traded REITs. First, only 85% to 90% of investor funds actually go towards investment purposes. In other words, investors have lost up to 15% of their investment to fees and costs on day one in a Non-Traded REIT. Second, often times part or almost all of the distributions that investors receive from Non-Traded REITs include a return of capital and not actual revenue generated from the properties owned by the REIT. The return of capital distributions reduces the ability of the REIT to generate income and/or increases the investment’s debt or leverage.

shutterstock_103079882As long time readers of our blogs know senior abuse is an ongoing concern in the securities industry. See Massachusetts Fines LPL Financial Over Variable Annuity Sales Practices to Seniors; The NASAA Announces New Initiative to Focus on Senior Investor Abuse; The Problem of Senior Investor Abuse – A Securities Attorney’s Perspective.

Recently, a number of regulatory agencies have begun new initiatives against investment fraud targeted at seniors with the intent to provide resources to seniors and financial advisors. Regulators fear senior abuse in the investment sector will be a growing trend over the next couple of decades if not addressed soon.

According to a National Senior Investor Initiative report cited by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the Social Security Administration estimates that each day for the next 15 years, an average of 10,000 Americans will turn 65. According to the U.S. Census Bureau in 2011, more than 13 percent Americans, more than 41 million people, were 65 or older. By 2040, that number is expected to grow 79 million doubling the number that were alive in 2000.

shutterstock_176319713The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) entered into an agreement whereby the regulatory fined LPL Financial LLC (LPL) and fined it $10 million for broad supervisory failures in a number of key areas, including the sales of non-traditional exchange-traded funds (Non-Traditional ETFs), certain variable annuity contracts, non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-Traded REITs) and other complex products, as well as its failure to monitor and report trades and deliver to customers more than 14 million trade confirmations. As part of the fine FINRA ordered LPL to pay approximately $1.7 million in restitution to customers who purchased non-traditional ETFs.

In a press release Brad Bennett, FINRA Executive Vice President and Chief of Enforcement, stated that “LPL’s supervisory breakdowns resulted from a sustained failure to devote sufficient resources to compliance programs integral to numerous aspects of its business. With today’s action, FINRA reaffirms that there is little room in the industry for lax supervision and that it will not hesitate to order firms to review and correct substandard supervisory systems and controls, and pay restitution to affected customers.”

This action is only one of many regulatory actions that our firm has tracked concerning LPL and its brokers including the following:

shutterstock_66745735As we previously reported, The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned brokerage firm World Equity Group, Inc. (World Equity) concerning at least seven different allegations of supervisory failures that occurred between 2009 through 2012. These failures included failures to implement an adequate supervisory system reasonably designed to detect and prevent potential rule violations concerning both internal processes and procedures and in the handling of customer accounts in the areas of suitability of transactions in non-traditional ETFs, private placements, and non-traded REITs.

FINRA alleged that World Equity failed to implement an adequate system to ensure the suitability of Non-Traditional ETFs. As a background, Non-Traditional ETFs are registered unit investment trusts or open-end investment companies whose shares represent an interest in a portfolio of securities that track an underlying benchmark, index, commodity, or other instrument. Shares of ETFs are typically listed on national exchanges and trade at established market prices. Non-Traditional ETFs are different from traditional ETFs in that they return a multiple of the performance of the underlying index or benchmark or the inverse performance.

Non-Traditional ETFs may use swaps, futures contracts, and other derivative instruments in order to create leverage to achieve these objectives. In addition, most Non-Traditional ETFs are designed to achieve their stated objectives in one trading session. Between trading sessions the fund manager generally rebalances the fund’s holdings in order to meet the fund’s objectives. For most Non-Traditional ETFs the rebalancing happens on a daily basis. Further, because the correlation between a Non-Traditional ETF and its linked index or benchmark is inexact there is typically tracking error between a fund and its benchmark becomes compounded over longer periods of time. In addition, the tracking error effect becomes more pronounced during periods of volatility in the underlying index or benchmark. FINRA advised brokerage firms in June 2009 due to the effect of compounding the performance of Non-Traditional ETFs over longer periods of time can differ significantly from the performance of their underlying index or benchmark during the same period of time and because of these risks and the inherent complexity of the products, FINRA advised broker-dealers and their representatives that the products are typically not suitable for retail investors who plan to hold them for more than one trading session.

shutterstock_185219489The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently sanctioned brokerage firm World Equity Group, Inc. (World Equity) alleging that between 2009 through 2012, the firm failed to implement an adequate supervisory system reasonably designed to detect and prevent potential rule violations including: (1) failure to preserve emails; (2) failure to establish and maintain account records and obtain suitability information; (3) failure to implement a supervisory system to ensure suitability of transactions in non-traditional ETFs; (4) failure to properly document adequate due diligence in connection with private placements and non-traded REITs; (5) failure to establish an adequate supervisory system for the review of activity for options activity in unapproved accounts; (6) failure to have a reasonable supervisory system to ensure compliance with Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933; and (7) failure to adequately enforce information barrier procedures.

World Equity is a full service broker dealer and has been a FINRA member since 1992. The firm is based in Illinois and has approximately 160 brokers operating out of 68 registered branch offices.

One of the offerings FINRA investigated at World Equity was Newport Digital Technologies, Inc. (NDT). In 2008, according to FINRA, World Equity hired a new syndicate manager by the initials MN to lead the business line out of the firm’s Spokane office. During MN’s tenure as syndicate manager, World Equity was involved in several private offerings including the NDT offering for which the firm acted as the placement agent. NDT had been registered with the SEC since 2000 and originally was known as Golden Choice Foods Corporation and then as International Food Products Group, Inc. (IFPG). These companies were in the consumer food business until December 2008.

shutterstock_189496604The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Stephen Dealy (Dealy) concerning allegations that Dealy willfully failed to timely amend his Form U4 to disclose a federal tax lien. FINRA also alleged that Dealy failed to report written complaints he received from his customers to Investors Capital Corp. (ICC).

Dealy first became registered with FINRA in 1983. From November 21, 2001 to September 12, 2014, Dealy was registered through ICC. On September 12, 2014, ICC filed a Form U5 terminating Dealy’s registration with the firm.

According to Dealy’s public disclosures the broker has been subject to seven customer complaints. These statistics are alarming because multiple customer complaints on a broker’s record are exceedingly rare. According to InvestmentNews, only about 12% of financial advisors have any type of disclosure event on their records. FINRA’s disclosure records do not just cover customer complaints but also include IRS tax liens, judgments, and even criminal matters. Therefore, the number of brokers with multiple customer complaints is constitutes only a very small percentage of licensed brokers.

Contact Information