Español Inner

Articles Posted in Retirement

Published on:

Recovery of Desert Capital REIT Losses

INVESTORLAWYER_6Q17_2012-11-12_Mon_Recovery of Desert Capital REIT Losses

Many investors who purchased Desert Capital REIT, a non-traded REIT, are consulting securities fraud attorneys in order to recover their REIT losses. Claims by investors include unsuitable recommendations and misrepresentations of Desert Capital REIT. In addition, many investors suffered losses as a result of overconcentration of funds in Desert Capital REIT.

Typically, REITs carry a high commission which motivates some brokers to make the recommendation to investors despite the investment’s unsuitability. The commission on a non-traded REIT is often as high as 15 percent. Non-traded REITs carry a relatively high dividend or high interest, making them attractive to retired investors. However, non-traded REITs are inherently risky and illiquid, which limits access of funds to investors. The most common complaints regarding the recommendation of Desert Capital REIT mention valuations, prospects, performance, liquidity, redemption and distribution of the investment. Many investors assert that they were not aware of the truth regarding these aspects and their decision to invest would have been affected if they’d had all of this information.

Published on:

Many investors are seeking avenues for recovery of REIT losses sustained in Behringer Harvard REIT I. This is only one of the Behringer Harvard REIT investments currently under investigation by stock fraud lawyers. Retired investors in particular have suffered unnecessary losses due to the unsuitability of this investment.

Recovery of Behringer Harvard REIT I Losses

Recently Behringer Harvard itself discovered it was being sued when an investor filed a class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in September. The investor, Lillian Hohenstein, purchased 1,275 shares between 2004 and 2008. The case alleges breach of fiduciary duty and negligence by the trust, members of its board and its executives. In addition to the class action, many brokerage firms who sold the investment are facing arbitration panels for their unsuitable recommendation of Behringer Harvard REIT I.

The main problem with Behringer Harvard REIT I is that many investors were led to believe the investment was safe and similar to high quality, fixed income securities and chose to invest because they believed it was a low-risk, income-producing investment. However, these investors were not aware of the high risks and illiquidity associated with non-traded REIT investments. Many investors also did not realize that they were not guaranteed distributions and some of the distributions that were made before distributions ceased came from loans, and not cash flows generate by the REIT. Furthermore, many retired individuals were overconcentrated in this investment because of its perceived income-producing feature. As a result, many investors have suffered significant REIT losses.

Published on:

Many investors have suffered significant REIT losses as a result of their investment in the Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT I. The investment’s $10 per share offering price in 2009 fell significantly to an approximate value of $4.12 per share at the end of last year, representing a 58 percent loss. This figure includes the 46 percent drop experienced at the end of 2010, when it was valued at around $7.66 per share.

Recovery of Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT I Losses

In the period beginning in December 2010 and ending in September 2011, Behringer Harvard Opportunity REIT I’s assets declined to $580 million from $697.6 million. The REIT reported an $83 million net loss.

According to investment fraud lawyers, many investors believed their non-traded REIT’s share price was stable. However, it only appeared stable because the manager reports the par value, which does not necessarily take into account the underlying assets deterioration. Furthermore, typically the initial pricing does not include fees and other expenses, which can result in a loss because these dollars are not actually invested.

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who have experienced significant losses as a result of their investment in Behringer Harvard Multifamily REIT I.

Behringer Harvard Multifamily REIT I Loss Recovery

“With an unlisted REIT, it’s generally understood that distributions must be paid to investors before assets are acquired, and therefore, before operating income covers distributions,” says Robert S. Aisner, president and CEO of Behringer Harvard Holdings, Behringer Harvard’s parent company. “Distributions at that phase are largely a return of the investor’s capital.”

However, many stock fraud lawyers would argue that this fact is not “generally understood” by, or explained to, investors by their financial advisor or brokerage firm.

Published on:

Earlier in October, another claim was filed in an effort to help investors recover REIT losses. This claim was against LPL Financial and its goal is to recover losses sustained in Retail Properties of America, formerly known as Inland Western Real Estate Investment Trust. This claim, which was filed with FINRA, also involves eight other alternative, illiquid investments, and is seeking $1,000,000 in damages.

Recovery of Inland Western REIT Losses

Typically, REITs carry a high commission which motivates brokers to make the recommendation to investors despite the investment’s unsuitability. The commission on a non-traded REIT is often as high as 15 percent. Non-traded REITs carry a relatively high dividend or high interest, making them attractive to retired investors. However, non-traded REITs are inherently risky and illiquid, which limits access of funds to investors. In addition, frequent updates of the investment’s current price are not required of broker-dealers, causing misunderstandings about the financial condition of the investment. Because frequent updates are not required, investors may believe the REIT is doing much better than it actually is.

Reportedly, LPL Financial and its advisor, used an over-concentration of illiquid investments in the client’s portfolio. Furthermore, these investments carried a high level of risk because the securities recommended to the claimant didn’t trade freely. In addition to the Inland Western REIT, the portfolio also consisted of KBS REIT, Inland American REIT, LEAF Fund, Hines REIT, Atlas, ATEL Fund X, PDC 2005A, and ATEL Fund XI

Published on:

David L. Rothman, a Pennsylvania resident, has been charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission for allegedly defrauding elderly clients. Stock fraud lawyers say the civil and criminal charges accuse Rothman of sending his clients falsified account statements that inflated the value of their accounts. Then, in a repayment scheme, Rothman took funds from another client in order to repay those who received phony statements.

Elderly Investors Targeted by Pennsylvania Financial Advisor

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.

Published on:

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of individuals who invested with Stephen B. Blankenship and were, as a result of Blankenship’s actions, victims of securities fraud. A recent announcement by the Securities and Exchange Commission stated that it has charged Blankenship and his company with stealing from customers. These customers, who were persuaded by Blankenship to make withdrawals from their brokerage accounts to invest directly with him, lost at least $600,000 to his fraud. The accounts from which they withdrew these funds were managed by Blankenship but were held at other firms.

Victim of Stephen B. Blankenship Fraud Could Recover Losses

According to the SEC’s allegations, Blankenship lured customers in with assurances of greater rates of return if they would transfer their money to Deer Hill Financial Group, Blankenship’s firm. Furthermore, he claimed to be investing in publicly-traded mutual funds and other established securities but, instead, made no such investments and transferred his customer’s money to his personal bank account. The money was then allegedly used to pay various personal expenses, including travel, grocery bills and mortgage payments.

“Blankenship took advantage of fellow churchgoers and senior citizens who relied on their savings for retirement and placed their trust in him,” says David P. Bergers, director of the SEC’s Boston Regional Office. “He betrayed that trust by using their money to make personal credit card payments and home improvements.”

Published on:

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of their investment with Ray Lucia Sr. and his affiliated broker-dealers. Reportedly, the Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Lucia and his company, formerly known as Raymond J. Lucia Companies Inc. (RJL), for using misleading information at a series of investment seminars when soliciting for his “Buckets of Money” strategy.

Customers of Ray Lucia, Sr. Could Recover Losses through Arbitration, Following SEC Allegations

According to the allegations issued by the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, Lucia claimed that this wealth management strategy had been thoroughly “backtested” over real bear market periods. He allegedly made these claims while promoting Buckets of Money at seminars where he presented a lengthy slideshow indicating that retires would receive inflation-adjusted income while protecting and increasing savings through his wealth management program. In truth, however, despite publicly made claims, little, if any, backtesting was done by RJL and Lucia on the Buckets of Money strategy.

These seminars were held in hopes of obtaining advisory clients, according to the SEC’s order which instituted administrative proceedings against RJL and Lucia. These clients would then be charged advisory services fees. Lucia’s radio show and personal and company website promoted the seminars.

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who have suffered significant losses as a result of their investment in CNL Lifestyle Properties Inc. Reportedly, a recent announcement from CNL Lifestyle Properties stated that its per share value estimate has dropped from its original share price of $10 to $7.31. This decline represents a drop of 27 percent, which could mean significant losses for many investors. Furthermore, the REIT is reportedly cutting investor dividends, or distribution.

CNL Lifestyle Properties REIT Investors Could Recover Losses

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority rules have established that brokers and 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.

The CNL Lifestyle Properties REIT is, according to investment fraud lawyers, another in a long line of non-traded REITs currently under investigation. REITs typically carry a high commission which motivates brokers to make the recommendation to investors despite the investment’s unsuitability. The commission on a non-traded REIT is often as high as 15 percent. Non-traded REITs, such as the CNL Lifestyle Properties REIT, carry a relatively high dividend or high interest, making them attractive to investors. However, these investments are inherently risky and illiquid, which limits access of funds to investors. This becomes a major problem for investors, especially retired individuals, who may need to access their funds when the need arises. For more information on REITs, see the previous blog post “FINRA Investor Alert: Public Non-Traded REITs.”

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