Securities Lawyers Blog

National Planning Corporation Broker Matthew Westfall Sanctioned Over Outside Business Activities and Non-Traded REIT Sales

March 28, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Matthew Westfall (Westfall) concerning allegations that from June 2011, through December 2012, while associated with the National Planning Corporation (National Planning), Westfall engaged in business activities outside the scope of his employment with the Firm. FINRA found that Westfall solicited 18 customers to purchase lraqi Dinar currency as an investment without firm approval to engage in this outside business activity. In addition, FINRA found that National Planning had internal guidelines that limited the amount customers were permitted to invest in illiquid investments, such as non-traded Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs). According to FINRA, Westfall submitted falsified documents that exaggerated the net worth for customers permitting investments in amounts that National Planning would have otherwise prohibited.

Westfall entered the securities industry in 1983. From 2003 until August 2010, Westfall was associated with Securities America, Inc. From September 2010 to December 2012, Westfall was associated with National Planning. Thereafter, in May 2013, Westfall became associated with Primex

FINRA found that Westfall engaged in an undisclosed outside business activity of selling Dinars to 18 National Planning customers. FINRA alleged that the 18 firm customers purchased $87,954 in Dinars through Wcstfall through a personal account that he had with an online company that sold Dinars. For these sales, Westfall received approximately $8,344 in compensation.

Hantz Financial Services Sanctioned Over Non-Traded REIT Due Diligence Failures

March 27, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned and fined Hantz Financial Services, Inc. (Hantz Financial) $75,000 concerning allegations that between April 2004, until April 2011, Hantz Financial violated FINRA rules by failing to properly enforce its written supervisory procedures for conducting due diligence with respect to a non-exchange traded real estate investment trust (REIT) and by failing to establish and maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed for conducting ongoing due diligence of REITs.

Hantz Financial has been a member of FINRA since 1999 and is headquartered in Southfield, Michigan. The firm employees 276 registered representatives and conducts a general securities business.

A REIT is a corporation or trust that owns income-producing real estate. REITs pool the capital of numerous investors to purchase a portfolio of properties that may include office building, shopping centers, hotels, and apartment buildings that the average investor would not otherwise be able to purchase individually. Shares of non-traded REITs do not trade on a national securities exchange and are generally illiquid for periods of eight years or more. The risks of non-traded REITs are significant and FINRA has issued an Investor Alert warning investors of some of the potential risks.

Gana LLP Files Complaint on Behalf of Former NFL Player

March 26, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP recently filed a complaint with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) on behalf of a former NFL athlete alleging that the brokerage firm Resource Horizons Group LLC (Resource Horizons) failed to supervise Robert Gist (Gist), one of the firm’s associated persons.

The claimant came to know Gist in the 1980s while playing in the NFL. The claimant knew that his NFL earnings would provide him with enough money to save for his retirement and support his lifestyle after retiring from the NFL and wanted Mr. Gist to prudently manage the funds. The claimant trusted Gist through many years of friendship and Gist was invited to the claimant’s family events and functions.

In 1991, Gist solicited the claimant to continue to invest with him at his new firm, Gist, Kennedy & Associates, Inc, (Gist, Kennedy) which also operated as a law firm. According to the complaint, Gist told the claimant that he could invest the couple’s retirement assets and an educational trust the claimant established for the benefit of their children and produce an income of between 7 to 10%.

Bill Tatro and Mary Helen Caprice Mallett Accused of Selling Unsuitable Private Placements Securities Part I

March 25, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently barred broker William (Bill) Tatro, formerly registered with First Allied Securities, Inc. (First Allied), concerning allegations that he failed to respond to two requests for information by FINRA staff in connection with an investigation into whether he violated federal securities laws or FINRA conduct rules. According to FINRA, Tatro admitted that he received both information requests but did not provide any of the requested information and documents because he claimed that he believed the bankruptcy court had stayed all requests pending the bankruptcy’s resolution. FINRA rejected Tatro’s bankruptcy defense and that Tatro violated FINRA Rules by failing to provide the information and documents FINRA staff requested and determined that Tatro should be permanently barred from associating with any FINRA member firm in any capacity.

FINRA initiated the investigation against Tatro after it received customer complaints and a series of Uniform Termination Notices (Forms U5) filed by Tatro’s former broker-dealer, First Allied. According to FINRA, the amended termination notices disclosed numerous customer complaints alleging fraud and other sales practice violations of more than 80 individuals who might be victims of Tatro’s alleged misconduct. Tatro total career related losses have been estimated to be anywhere from $10 million to $100 million and may potentially involve as many as 1,000 clients. On July 30, 2012, Tatro filed a petition for bankruptcy with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of New York.

Tatro began his securities career in 1975 and worked at six different broker-dealers before becoming associated with First Allied in November 2003. After Tatro left First Allied he operated Biltmore Wealth Advisors, LLC, an investment advisory firm in Phoenix, Arizona. Tatro also operated Eagle Steward Wealth Management, an investment advisory firm. Tatro’s wife, colleague, and business partner, Mary Helen Caprice Mallett (Mallett) has also advised Tatro clients and has been accused of recommending the same or similar speculative investments that characterizes Tatro’s practice.

Edward Jones Sanctioned Over Unsuitable Nontraditional ETF Sales

March 21, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (Edward Jones) concerning allegations that between January 2008 and July 2009, Edward Jones failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system that were reasonably designed to ensure that the sales of leveraged and inverse exchange traded funds (Nontraditional ETFs) complied with applicable securities laws. FINRA found that Edward Jones registered representatives recommended nontraditional ETFs to customers without first investigating those products sufficiently to understand the features and risks of the product and that consequently these recommendations were unsuitable.

Edward Jones a Missouri limited partnership and a full-service broker-dealer since 1939. The firm’s principal offices are located in St. Louis, Missouri and the firm has more than 15,000 registered representatives and more than 10,000 branch offices throughout the United States.

As a background, Non-Traditional ETFs are usually registered unit investment trusts or open-end investment companies and are considered to be novel investment products. While ETFs came be common place in the 1990s, the first nontraditional ETFs began trading in 2006. By 2009, over 100 Non-Traditional ETFs existed in the market place with total assets of approximately $22 billion. Since 2009, the number of nontraditional ETFs on the market has since increased to more than 250.

JP Turner Sanctioned By FINRA Over Non-Traditional ETF Sales and Mutual Fund Switches

March 20, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) ordered J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. (JP Turner) to pay $707,559 in restitution to 84 customers for sales of unsuitable leveraged and inverse exchange-traded funds (Non-Traditional ETFs) and for excessive mutual fund switches. The current fine and is just one of several sanctions that regulators have brought against JP Turner brokers concerning the firms sales and supervisory practices.

Brad Bennett, FINRA Executive Vice President and Chief of Enforcement, was quoted in the settlement stating that “Securities firms and their registered reps must understand the complex products they are selling and the risks inherent to the products, and be able to determine if they are suitable for investors before recommending them to retail customers.”

As a background, Non-Traditional ETFs are novel products that have grown significantly in popularity since 2006. By 2009, over 100 Non-Traditional ETFs existed in the market place with total assets of approximately $22 billion. A leveraged ETF seeks to deliver two or three times an index or benchmark return the ETF tracks. Non-Traditional ETFs can also be “inverse” or “short” meaning that the investment returns the opposite of the performance the index or benchmark. While both ETFs and Non-Traditional ETFs track indexes, Non-Traditional ETFs contain significant risks that are not associated with traditional ETFs. Non-Traditional ETFs have additional risks of daily reset, use of leverage, and compounding.

Gana LLP Seeks Relief for Victim of Stanford Ponzi Scheme Against Clearing Broker, Pershing, LLC

March 19, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Over the last several years, we have seen the collapse of frauds and the capture of fraudsters, who have perpetuated a mind-numbing blow to the market and its participants. When we talk about Ponzi Schemes, the first name that springs to mind is, of course, Bernard Madoff. However, two years later authorities honed in on R. Allen Stanford (Stanford) and his fraudulent empire, which may have more far-reaching consequences than people think.

While the ponzi scheme developed and operated by Stanford fleeced investors of “only” eight billion dollars, it was perhaps far more damaging than the Madoff scheme. Why? Because the Stanford case pertains to everybody—not just to Stanford investors, not just the government, and not just the upper echelon of wealthy individuals. The Stanford scheme exploited one of the oldest, safest, and most universally understood financial instruments on the market—the Certificate of Deposit (CDs).

The ultimate reality of the Stanford Financial Group was that it was a Ponzi scheme. Essentially, Stanford and his co-conspirators used the Stanford Financial Group and the promise of high-return CD’s to lure investor money into different Stanford companies, where the funds were then pooled together and used for undisclosed and impermissible purposes. Federal authorities ultimately discovered Stanford’s multi-billion dollar scheme, putting an end to Stanford Financial Group and charging Stanford, civilly and criminally, with multiple counts of fraud. In March 2012, Stanford was convicted on 13 of 14 counts by a federal jury following a six-week trial and approximately three days of deliberation. It was ultimately revealed that the Stanford Financial Group was “selling” CD’s, marketed as low-risk, high return investments, but in reality, were paying distributions with subsequent investments–the prototypical pyramid scheme.

Former LPL Financial Broker Brian Brunhaver Accused of Fraud in the Sale of Non-Traded REITs

March 18, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has brought a complaint against financial advisor Brian H. Brunhaver (Brunhaver) formerly of LPL Financial, LLC (LPL) concerning allegations Brunhaver used an unauthorized e-mail account for communications related to his securities business and committed securities fraud in making oral and written misrepresentations to customers regarding a non-traded REIT.

Brunhaver entered the securities industry in 1994. From May 1995, until June 2011, he was registered through LPL. On or about June 2, 2011, LPL filed a Uniform Termination Notice (Form U5) for Brunhaver disclosing that he had been discharged on May 3, 2011. From August 2011, until December 2011, Brunhaver was registered through Pacific West Securities, Inc. On or about February 25, 2013, LPL filed an Amended Form U5 disclosing the receipt of a Statement of Claim where certain customers of Brunhaver alleged that he had recommended unsuitable investments in REITs and had made misrepresentations to them while employed by LPL.

In addition, Brunhaver’s BrokerCheck discloses that the broker has at least nine customer complaints filed against him. The majority of the complaints involve allegations that Brunhaver made unsuitable recommendations and material misrepresentations in the sale of non-traded REITs including Inland American REIT, among others. LPL has been sanctioned by regulatory authorities for failing to supervise its broker’s sales of non-traded REITs

Are Your Investments Appropriate for You?

March 17, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Most investors know that their financial advisor cannot misrepresent the risks and rewards of investments. However, many investors do not realize that all brokers have an obligation to deal fairly with investors by only recommending suitable investments or investment strategies. All sales efforts are judged by the ethical standards of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) that sets industry wide investment standards. The “suitability rule” contains three primary obligations: reasonable-basis, customer-specific, and quantitative suitability.

Reasonable-basis suitability means that the broker must believe, based on appropriate research and due diligence, that the product or strategy being recommended is suitable for at least some investors. Thus, FINRA recognizes that there are some investment products and strategies that are so risky and likely to fail that they would be inappropriate for all investors. Other investments may contain risks characteristics that are only appropriate for a very small group of investors or for specialized purposes.

Customer-specific suitability requires the broker to believe that the recommended investment strategy is suitable for that particular customer. The advisor must take into consideration the customer’s risk tolerance, investment objectives, age, financial circumstances, other investment holdings, experience, and other information provided to the broker.

John Towers of VSR Financial Sanctioned Over Unsuitable Sale of Alternative Investments and Private Placement Securities

March 15, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned financial advisor John H. Towers (Towers) of VSR Financial Services, Inc. (VSR) concerning allegations of unsuitable sales of over $6,000,000 in alternative investments including oil and gas interests, real estate investment trusts (REITs), and other speculative private placement investments to an investor. FINRA’s determinations in this matter is significant because some in financial industry take the position that wealthy customers are automatically sophisticated and therefore fair game to recommend positions in speculative private placement securities. The theory goes that if you have a lot of money then it is ok for you to lose some of it speculating in alternative investments.

Towers entered the securities industry in 1970. From 2002 until December 2013, Towers was associated with VSR. According to Towers’ BrokerCheck at least 14 customers have filed complaints against Towers. The vast majority of those complaints involve claims concerning the improper sale of various private placement securities.

FINRA alleged that in September 2005, Towers recommended that a married couple invest $25,000 in APC 2005-B, a high risk private placement. Over the next five years, FINRA found that Towers continually recommended that the couple make an additional eighty-eight investments in private placements and REITs totaling approximately $6,259,400 and representing approximately 72% of their investments purchased at VSR. FINRA alleged that the private placements and REITS were all described in the offering documents as high risk investments. FINRA also found that the couple had stated a moderate risk tolerance on their new account forms and specified that no more than 10% of their accounts were to be invested in high risk products.