Español Inner

Articles Tagged with Inland Western

Published on:

Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C., a New York City law firm handling arbitration claims on behalf of investors throughout the United States, has filed multiple Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) arbitration proceedings on behalf of investors who allege that registered representatives of LPL Financial Holdings, Inc.’s (Nasdaq:LPLA) brokerage subsidiary recommended unsuitable investments in non-traded REITs.

Suitability claims arise when stockbrokers or investment advisors recommend investments that are not appropriate for an investor’s financial circumstances, risk tolerance, or investment goals. FINRA Conduct Rule 2310 requires that Members and their Representatives have a reasonable basis to recommend a transaction or investment strategy suitable for the customer, based on information obtained through reasonable diligence and the customer’s investment profile. A customer’s investment profile includes, but is not limited to, the customer’s age, other investments, financial situation and needs, tax status, investment objectives, investment experience, time horizon, liquidity needs, and risk tolerance.

Cases filed by the Gray Firm allege that in certain circumstances, LPL lacked a reasonable basis to recommend certain non-traded REITs, including Inland Western REIT (now known as Retail Properties of America. As a private unlisted investment, Inland Western was a Non-Conventional Investment (“NCI”). FINRA’s Notice to Members 03 71 states that “since NCIs often have complex terms and features that are not easily understood,” there exists the potential for customer harm or confusion since investors do not understand the risks involved. Members must conduct appropriate due diligence/reasonable basis suitability before offering these investments to the public. Specifically the Notice states that when offering NCI investments, FINRA Members are required to:

Published on:

According to stock fraud lawyers, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority has and will continue to relentlessly target non-traded real estate investment trusts, or REITs. Specifically, the regulatory authority is focusing on how broker-dealers sell these investments and potential shortcomings in their strategies. According to the Executive Vice President of Member Regulation Sales Practices at FINRA, Susan Axelrod, examiners at FINRA have been scrutinizing “numerous retail sellers of non-traded REITs.” Axelrod also stated that, “In several instances, FINRA examiners have found that firms selling these products failed to conduct reasonable diligence before selling a product and failed to make a determination that the product was suitable for investors.”

FINRA Targets Non-traded REITs

Investment fraud lawyers note that independent broker-dealers have a responsibility to perform adequate due diligence when selling any investment, especially complex, illiquid products. Since the 2008 market collapse, FINRA has been aggressive with broker-dealers who failed to do so. Axelrod stated to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association’s Complex Products Forum that, “FINRA examiners have noted that in the instances of REITs that have experienced financial difficulties, red flags existed and should have been considered by firms prior to the product being offered to firm clients.”

Another problem with non-traded REITs, according to Axelrod, is that “non-traded REITs may also borrow funds to make distributions if operating cash flow is insufficient, and excessive borrowing may increase the risk of default or devaluation. In addition, non-traded-REIT distributions may actually be a return on principal.”

Published on:

For quite some time now, securities fraud attorneys have been investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of their investments in Retail Properties of America REIT, formerly known as Inland Western. Reportedly, the chief executive of Inland Real Estate Group of Cos. Inc., Daniel Goodwin, recently expressed criticism about the Retail Properties of America Inc.’s IPO timing. A new lawsuit states that in January 2011, the REIT told investors before the offering that they could expect a value of $17.25 per share. However, at the time of the offering, the REIT’s shares, adjusted for the stock split, were actually only valued at $3.20 a share. This also was significantly lower than the $10 price which the majority of investors paid per share.

Retail Properties of America, Formerly Inland Western, Faces More Problems

According to Goodwin, Inland Real Estate Group of Cos. Inc. has no control over Retail Properties of America. Furthermore, when asked if Inland would join in the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois — which is seeking class action status — Goodwin said, “We have discussed various potential actions but haven’t reached a conclusion. Our interests are clearly aligned with the shareholders.”

Investment fraud lawyers say Retail Properties of America is the third-largest shopping center REIT in the nation. In April 2012, Retail Properties of America was converted to a publicly traded New York Stock Exchange company from a non-traded REIT.

Contact Information