Reportedly, Pennsylvania regulators are currently looking into non-traded REIT sales conducted by Securities America employees. Securities America is owned by broker-dealer Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc., which also owns two more independent brokerage firms. Ladenburg stated in its annual report that Pennsylvania regulators wanted to be provided with data regarding non-traded REITs purchased by Pennsylvania residents since 2007.

Securities arbitration lawyers are currently unsure if the non-traded REIT sales investigation will extend to firms other than Securities America.

Last year, multiple independent brokerage firms, including Securities America, paid to settle charges regarding non-traded REIT sales with the Massachusetts Securities Division. Securities America’s piece of that pie included a $150,000 fine and restitution to clients totaling $8.4 million. The Massachusetts probe found that several firms had trouble abiding state rules, as well as their own policies, regarding non-traded REIT sales.

According to investment fraud lawyers, firms have an obligation to fully disclose all the risks of a given investment when making recommendations, and those recommendations must be suitable for the individual investor receiving the recommendation given their age, investment objectives and risk tolerance. Non-traded REITs are inherently risky and illiquid, which limits access of funds to investors and makes them unsuitable for many individuals with conservative risk tolerances and those who need easy access to funds.

If you are a Securities America customer, or customer of another full-service brokerage firm, who suffered significant losses because of the unsuitable recommendation of non-traded REITs, you may have a valid securities arbitration claim. To find out more about your legal rights and options, contact a securities arbitration lawyer at Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C. at (866) 966-9598 or newcases@investorlawyers.net for a no-cost, confidential consultation.

Current allegations against Bard include breach of contract, negligence, fraud through omission of material fact and violation of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) regulations and other securities laws, among others. Before incorporating his investment firm in December 2004, Bard was terminated from the investment firm where he worked for allegedly preparing and submitting investment documents with forged signatures of his customers. A FINRA investigation confirmed these charges and Bard signed a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent.

In August 2013, Bard was found guilty of 21 felony counts of offenses related to securities fraud. According to stock fraud lawyers, FINRA rules have established that firms must properly supervise brokers’ activities while they are registered with the firm. Reportedly, Scottrade, Ameritrade, Choice Investments and E-Trade have been named in an arbitration claim soon to be filed on behalf of some of Bard’s clients and these investment firms could be ordered to compensate clients for losses sustained for the period Bard was registered with the firms.

The current or pending claims of arbitration include between 50 and 70 of the accounts Bard managed. However, Bard reported in May 2009 that he managed 140 accounts for as many as 250 clients; securities fraud attorneys believe that many of those clients may have been the victims of securities fraud. The accounts contained assets totaling around $9 million.

If you were a client of Robert G. Bard, you should call a supervisor at the brokerage firm where your account is held and compare what you believe to be the value of your accounts with what the firm believes the total account value or liquidation value is. If your account has suffered significant losses, you may have a valid securities arbitration claim. To find out more about your legal rights and options, contact a stock fraud lawyer at Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C. at (866) 966-9598 or newcases@investorlawyers.net for a no-cost, confidential consultation.

According to the SEC’s complaint, the two clients were “elderly and unsophisticated investors” which, securities arbitration lawyers say, made them ideal targets for Rothman’s fraud. The complaint further alleges that the fraud occurred from 2006-2011 and the falsified statements “materially overstated” the value of the clients’ investments. In addition, allegations against Rothman state that once the investors realized the fraud had taken place, the financial advisor stated that he would repay the statements’ reported value. However, his financial resources eventually ran short.

Apparently, Rothman was previously censured by the CFP Board in 2004. This separate matter involved the purchasing of mutual fund Class S shares.

Stock fraud lawyers say that it is not enough for investors to simply read their account statements, but they should examine them thoroughly for indications of fraud. Many investment schemes take place over a long period of time. In this case, the scheme continued for five years and did not stop until the fraud was discovered by one of the clients. Diligence in examining statements can significantly reduce the amount of investor losses by discovering fraud sooner.

Though all investors should closely examine their account statements, elderly and retired investors are common targets for fraud. For more information on how elderly investors can be on the watch for fraud in their investment accounts, see the previous blog post, “Investment Fraud Red Flags for Elderly Investors.”

If, after thoroughly examining your account statements, you believe you have been defrauded, find out more about your legal rights and options by contacting a securities arbitration lawyer at The Law Office of Christopher J. Gray at (866) 966-9598 for a no-cost, confidential consultation.

The TW Tax Advantage Fund, created by First Republic Investment Management, is a complicated, high-risk municipal arbitrage bond. Investment fraud lawyers are attempting to determine whether the necessary due diligence was performed by brokerage firms prior to the offering the investment for sale to their clients. Furthermore, broker-dealers may not have properly disclosed the features and risks of this complicated product. Shortly after the fund’s creation, it collapsed. As a result, investors of the fund suffered significant losses.

Securities arbitration lawyers are also investigating Harrisburg municipal bond. The general-obligation bond payments were missed for the first time by Harrisburg’s insolvent capital. Furthermore, its receiver is seeking approval for an asset sales plan. Reportedly, Harrisburg’s debt load is five times more than its general-fund budget and it missed bond payments amounting to $5.27 million. The bond payments were due on March 15. These payments were for bonds issued in 1997, amounting to $51.5 million.

Prior to recommending an investment to a client, brokers are required to perform the necessary due diligence to establish whether the investment is suitable for the client given their age, investment objectives and risk tolerance. According to investment fraud lawyers, many of the firms that sold the TW Tax Advantage Fund did not appear to perform the necessary due diligence, based on what is known about the investment. Financial professionals who sold Harrisburg bonds must also prove they performed the necessary due diligence, and firms may be liable for investor losses if they failed to heed warning signs that due diligence was not being performed by brokers.

If you incurred losses as a result of your investments in Harrisburg or the TW Tax Advantage Fund, you may have a valid securities arbitration claim. To find out more about your legal rights and options, contact a securities arbitration lawyer at The Law Office of Christopher J. Gray at (866) 966-9598 for a no-cost, confidential consultation.

Bank of America held commercial loans from small banks amounting to around $400 million in 2006. In 2007, securities packages were put together from these loans and then sold to investors. The subpoena arrives only one day after Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Co., Citigroup Inc. and Ally Financial Inc. settled allegations of engaging in abusive mortgage practices. These abusive practices included engaging in deceptive practices in the offering of loan modifications, a failure to offer other options before closing on borrowers with federally insured mortgages, submitting improper documents to the bankruptcy court and robo-signing foreclosure documents without proper review of the paperwork.

The settlement amounted to $25 billion and involved federal agencies plus authorities in 49 states. This settlement is designed to give $2,000 to around 750 borrowers whose homes were foreclosed upon after the home values dropped 33 percent from their 2006 worth, and to provide mortgage relief. In addition, all five banks will pay $766.5 million in penalties to the Federal Reserve. This is considered to be the biggest federal-state settlement ever. Bank of America will also pay $1 billion to settle allegations that it, together with its Countrywide Financial unit, engaged in fraudulent and wrongful conduct.

Needless to say, between the recent settlement, the subpoena regarding two of its CLOs, and numerous potential securities arbitration claims related to its CDOs, Bank of America is not off to a good start in 2012. If suspicions about the Bank of America CLOs turn out to be correct, investors who suffered losses as a result may have a valid securities arbitration claim. Investors are advised to stay informed on this issue as it holds potential for loss recovery.