Articles Tagged with Icon Leasing Fund Eleven

shutterstock_114128113Our firm has written numerous times about investor losses in programs such as various equipment leasing programs like LEAF Equipment Leasing Income Funds I-IV and ICON Leasing Funds Eleven and Twelve. These direct participation programs, like their non-traded REIT and oil and gas cousins, all suffer from the same crippling flaw that dooms these investments to a high likelihood of failure from the get go. The costs and fees associated with all of these investments cause the security to be so costly that only unprecedented market boom conditions can lead to profitability. Market stagnation or decline makes any significant return a virtual impossibility.

Yet, investors are in no way compensated for these additional risks. These investments tout high yield like returns for risks far in excess of traditional high yield investments. In fact, the only reason brokers sell these products is because of the high sales commissions coupled with the lack of price transparency that allows these products to be displayed at inflated values for years on investor account statements.

In an equipment leasing program a sponsor sells limited partnership units then takes out substantial offering costs and fees and invests the remainder in a pool of equipment leases that are leveraged up with additional borrowing. Brokers market these products as a predictable income stream but in fact, and what nearly all brokers fail to mention, is that a substantial portion of investor distributions are actually a return of their original investment and not actually income generated from operations.

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are currently investigating Icon Leasing Fund Eleven and Twelve on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of the unsuitable recommendation of these funds. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have filed arbitrations against broker dealers that have sold these illiquid investments to their clients. Both NFP Securities, Inc. and WFG Investments Inc. have been know to sell the Icon Funds to their clients.

Allegedly, many advisors who sold the Icon investments failed to adequately explain that the funds operated as an equipment leasing program. Given the nature of the Icon Funds, in which capital is consolidated for the purchase and leasing of equipment, made the fund illiquid.

According to recent filings in securities arbitrations, during the offering period, the funds paid healthy distributions. However, not long after the funds were closed to new investors, the value of the Icon Funds began to decline and dividend payments became sporadic. By the end of 2012, Icon Leasing Fund 12 lost 53% of its value. For the same time period, Icon Leasing Fund 11 suffered an 84% decline in value. Furthermore, it has been alleged that the Icon Funds did not properly disclose that the distributions included return of original principal and that the fees were extraordinarily high.

Contact Information