alternative investments

WFG Investments Sanctioned Over Failure to Review Transactions for Suitability Part II

February 9, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

This article continues our prior post concerning The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recent sanctions of brokerage firm WFG Investments, Inc. (WFG) alleging a host of supervisory failures from March 2007, through January 2014.

In one supervisory failure example involving suitability, FINRA found that between 2009, and 2013, a broker by the initials “MC” (1) traded with discretion in several of his customers’ accounts without their written authorization; and (2) also excessively traded in at least one of his customer’s accounts in light the customer’s investment objectives and risk tolerance. FINRA also alleged that many of the securities traded were also qualitatively unsuitable in light of the customers’ age, objectives, risk tolerance, and financial situation. In addition, several of the customer’s accounts were charged both commissions and management fees and this problem was not identified or corrected even after it was detected.

FINRA also alleged that MC used unapproved charts and provided consolidated statements to a customer without the firm’s knowledge or approval. Moreover, allegedly there were exception reports that highlighted the problem trading activity in several of these accounts that were simply not reviewed or not properly processed. In fact, FINRA found that one of the customers who complained about unsuitable activity in her accounts was not contacted by the firm until after she had complained despite the fact that her accounts had appeared on numerous exception reports. Similarly, FINRA found that broker SGD was also permitted by the WFG to engage in unsuitable trading in one of his customer’s accounts which included the recommendation and sale of numerous high risk equity and ETF purchases for a retired client with a conservative risk tolerance.

FINRA Sanctions WFG Investments $700,000 for Supervisory Failures Part I

February 6, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently sanctioned brokerage firm WFG Investments, Inc. (WFG) alleging a host of supervisory failures from March 2007, through January 2014. FINRA alleged that WFG failed to commit the necessary time, attention, and resources to critical regulatory obligations in supervising registered representatives including: (1) failure to conduct appropriate due diligence on a private placement offering that was sold by a broker away from the firm; (2) failure to supervise the private securities transactions of one of its brokers that were executed through the representative’s investment advisory firm; (3) failure to maintain a supervisory system to ensure customer transactions were suitable; (4) failure to enforce its written supervisory procedures regarding the sale of alternative investments; (5) failure to supervise statements made by one broker on his weekly radio broadcast; and (6) failure to timely report customer complaints and update the Forms U4 and U5 of its brokers.

WFG has been a FINRA member since 1988, conducts a general securities business, and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas. WFG currently has about 280 brokers operating out of 102 branch offices.

FINRA alleged that in 2007, a WFG broker by the initials “SGD” provided notice to the firm that he intended to sell a private placement offering FINRA called “ATMA” to his customers. ATMA was designed to offer an income stream to investors based revenues form automated teller machines (ATMs). In evaluating a selling agreement with SGD, FINRA alleged that WFG assigned its compliance officer known by the initials “TS” to conduct due diligence on ATMA. TS owned a 5% interest in ATMA and SGD was the 90% owner and the operator of ATMA, had no prior experience in structuring and offering private placement investments. FINRA found that the entity that was to provide the ATM machines to ATMA was engaged in fraudulent business practices and most of the ATMs were fictional. FINRA found that WFG declined to enter into a selling agreement with SGD, but permitted him SGD to sell interests in ATMA as private securities transactions.

Gana LLP Broker Investigation – Former Berthel Fisher Broker Robert Smith

December 5, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating a series of claims before The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) in relation to the conduct of financial advisor Robert Smith (Smith). Smith has been accused by at least 10 customers over his career concerning allegations that Smith overconcentrated the customer’s accounts in private placement securities including equipment leasing programs, oil & gas investments, and non-traded real estate investment trusts (Non-traded REITs).

Smith has been registered with several broker dealers over the years. Starting in 2000 Smith was registered with American General Securities (n/k/a SagePoint Financial, Inc.) until May 2006. Thereafter, Smith was associated with ProEquities, Inc. until June 2010. Finally, from June 2010, until June 2014, Smith was registered with Berthel, Fisher & Company Financial Services, Inc. (Berthel Fisher). Currently, Smith is not registered with any FINRA firm. Upon information and belief, from 2006 on Smith operated his securities business under a DBA called Proactive Retirement Investing.

The large number of complaints against Smith concerning the same or similar charges of misconduct is unusual in the brokerage industry. Most brokers go their entire careers without a single complaint. A small number have one or two complaints. But only a tiny percentage have more than two customer complaints. Here, at least 10 customers have made allegations against Smith all concerning difficult to value private placement securities.

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.

An Examination of LPL Financial’s Recent Regulatory Woes

October 7, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

LPL Financial, LLC (LPL) is one of the largest independent brokerage firms in the United States employing approximately 13,840 registered reps and advisers. However, the firm’s growth has come with a host of regulatory actions focusing on the firm’s alleged supervisory failures.

Recently, InvestmentNews reported that the firm was hit with a $2 million fine, and ordered to pay $820,000 in restitution, for failing to maintain adequate books and records documenting variable annuity exchanges. The mounting firm fines have led to flat second quarter earnings at LPL. The firm has stated that the company is instituting enhanced procedures with a view to ensuring that surrender charges incurred in connection with variable annuity exchange transactions are accurately reflected in the firm’s books and records as well as in any disclosures given to clients. The firm is also purportedly taking steps to make sure that its advisers are adequately documenting the basis for their variable annuity recommendations.

LPL has been on the radar of FINRA and several state regulators that have focused on the firm’s supervisory and other record systems as well as examining sales of investment products, including non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs). In February 2013, LPL settled with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to pay at least $2 million in restitution and $500,000 in fines concerning the firm’s non-traded REIT practices. In addition, in the last year, FINRA has fined LPL Financial $7.5 million for significant e-mail system failures. Moreover, we have reported on numerous LPL registered representatives who have been fined over the past year for a variety of misconduct ranging from misappropriation of funds, sales of alternative investments, selling away activities, and private placements.

FINRA Sanctions 79 Capital Securities Over GWG Debenture Sales

September 10, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned brokerage firm 79 Capital Securities, LLC (79 Capital) and broker Michael Ward (Ward) concerning allegations around June and July 2012, 79 Capital and Ward posted on the website of a business networking organization sales material regarding GWG Renewable Secured Debentures (GWG Debentures), an illiquid and high-risk alternative private placement investment that omitted material information concerning the debentures. Additionally, FINRA alleged that the firm and Ward failed to record basic suitability information and create new account forms for customers involved in two transactions for the purchase of debentures. Finally, FINRA found that respondents also permitted an employee whose FINRA registration had not been approved, to sell the GWG Debentures and in doing so failed to enforce the firm’s written procedures requiring the creation of new account forms and prohibiting unregistered persons from effecting securities transactions.

According to our investigation, 79 Capital is the third brokerage firm or broker to be sanctioned by FINRA in the past year concerning the improper sale of GWG Debentures. See Broker Sanctioned Over Unsuitable Sales of Private Placement Securities (FINRA sanctioned Karen Geiger); FINRA Sanctions Michael Wurdinger and Anil Vazirani Over GWG Debenture Sales (FINRA sanctioned brokers associated with Center Street Securities, Inc.).

As a background, GWG Holdings, Inc. purchases life insurance policies on the secondary market at a discount to the face value of the policies. Once purchased, GWG pays the policy premiums until the insured dies and then GWG collects the face value of the insurance hoping to earn returns by collecting more upon the maturity of the policies than it has paid to purchase the policy and service the premiums. FINRA found that the company has a limited operating history and has yet to be profitable.

Gana LLP Investigates Broker Angelo Talebi’s Investment Activities: Attention Iranian Investors in California

July 23, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating claims that broker Angelo Talebi (Talebi) made misrepresentations regarding investments in alternative investments such as Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and oil and gas limited partnerships. Upon information and belief, Talebi is targeting Iranian investors in California. According to Talebi’s BrokerCheck, at least 13 customer complaints have been filed regarding Talebi’s sales practices in FINRA arbitration. Some of the complaints also allege that Talebi unsuitably invested clients in various investments including variable annuities and private placements including KBS 1 REIT, Leaf Equipment finance, Inland American Real Estate Trust, Atlas Resources. Another complaint alleges unsuitable equity investments and excessive use of margin.

From 1999 through December 2012, Talebi was associated with LPL Financial LLC (LPL Financial). Thereafter, until April 2014, Talebi was a registered representative of Royal Alliance Associates, Inc. Currently, Talebi is associated with Independent Financial Group, LLC.

The investment products that Talebi is alleged to have inappropriately recommended to clients are part of a growing industry trend of placing investors heavily in alternative investments and illiquid products. Many times brokers tell investors that these products are more stable and predictable than the stock market. After the financial crisis many investors were receptive to these sales pitches. However, brokers sometimes fail to disclose that the stability of these investments is artificially generated by the lack of disclosure and trading market for these products. In the cases of REITs and oil and gas private placements investors may only learn years after investing that the value of these assets has fallen substantially and some investors do not know of their losses until the investment goes completely bust.

Broker Robert Acri Barred Over Failure to Respond to FINRA Investigation

May 30, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently barred broker Robert Acri (Acri) concerning allegations that in December 2013, and January 2014, Acri failed to fully respond to a Rule 8210 request for documents and information concerning Acri’s sale of alternative investments and promissory notes.

Acri first entered the securities industry in 1988. From December 2007 through April 2009, Acri was associated with Chicago Investment Group, LLC. After that, he was representative with Spyglass Securities, LLC from June 2010 through June 2011. Acri was last associated with World Equity Group, Inc. from June 25, 2012 through June 6, 2013. World Equity Group terminated Acri by a Form U5 filed on June 10, 2013.

According to Acri’s BrokerCheck Acri listed his outside business activities as being involved in The Synergy Fund, Synergy Private Capital Fund, Kam Private Fund all of which is listed as investment related. In addition, the disclosures state that Acri is the president of IRCA Coporation.

Sales of Non-Traded REITs Contributes to Increased Broker Dealer Revenues

May 21, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Despite the broad market’s recent volatility, 2013 brought the twenty-five largest independent broker dealers double-digit revenue growth on average, according to an Investment News report. After a weak 2012, these independent broker dealers roared to a 13.2% year over year increase in revenue, recording $18.46 billion in 2013 according to this year’s Investment News survey.

The overall strength of the S&P 500, gaining 29.6% in 2013 was one contributing factor to the 2013 success of independent broker dealers. The other factor however, was a flood of commissions generated from record sales of alternative investment products, namely non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs). As Eric Schwartz, chief executive of Cambridge Investment Research explained, “There were two reasons for last year’s results. The stock market was up 30%, and there was an unusually high percentage of dollars in alternatives and REITs being sold. Remember, a number of REITs had public listings, and clients reinvested back into other REITs.”

According to the Investment News survey, the top ten independent broker-dealers with the most growth from alternative investments include: (1) Independent Financial Group; (2) Triad Advisors; (3) Royal Alliance Associates; (4) National Planning Corp.; (5) First Allied Securities; (6) Lincoln Financial Network; (7) Cambridge Investment Research; (8) Commonwealth Financial Network; (9) Ameriprise Financial Services; 10) LPL Financial.

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.