Articles Posted in Texas

Published on:

Investor arbitration lawyers continue to investigate claims on behalf of customers of VSR Financial Services regarding the unsuitable recommendation and sale of alternative investments.

More Claims Filed Against VSR Brokers for Unsuitable Alternative Investments

Another claim was filed recently against one broker registered with VSR Financial Services, Dennis Van Patter. This particular claim is regarding the following alternative investments:

  • Inland American Real Estate Trust
Published on:

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of the unsuitable recommendation and sale of alternative investments. In one recent arbitration claim, filed in Texas, two VSR Financial Services clients are seeking $600,000 in damages that allegedly resulted from the unsuitable recommendation and sale of alternative investments. The investments named in the claim include:

  • NetREIT Common
  • Florida Capital Real Estate Partners 27
Published on:

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of doing business with Wade James Lawrence. Lawrence, a former broker for Lubbock Investments, recently surrendered his securities license because the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) requested he give testimony regarding his conduct and Lawrence failed to appear for the on-the-record interview.

Customers of Wade James Lawrence, Merrill Lynch, Oppenheimer Could Recover Losses

Lawrence is also the defendant in two lawsuits filed in November. According to the allegations in these lawsuits, Lawrence failed to repay $1 million in loans made by private individuals. Reportedly, Lawrence stated in November 2013 that he would turn himself over to regulators “regarding allegations of illegal securities trading practices.”

According to FINRA reports, Lawrence has been accused of causing $140,000 in customer losses because of inappropriate trades during the time he worked with Southwest Securities and $71,000 in customer losses because of unauthorized trading when he was with Oppenheimer.

Published on:

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who have suffered significant losses because their broker, adviser or firm did not notify or obtain their permission before executing trades on their account. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Parallax Investments LLC and Tri-Star Advisors allegedly executed thousands of transactions through their affiliated broker-dealer without disclosing their actions to clients.

SEC Investigates Two Firms for Failure to Disclose or Obtain Permission for Principal Transactions

According to stock fraud lawyers, principal transactions usually involve an investment adviser who uses affiliate brokerage firms to act on behalf of its account. However, conflicts of interest frequently arise between adviser and client. Therefore, securities fraud attorneys say that advisers must disclose any monetary interest or conflicted role in written form when advising the client and obtaining permission.

Parallax Investments LLC, Tri-Star Advisors and three executives — John P. Bott II, Jon C. Vaughan and William T. Payne — all based in Houston, Texas, face securities charges regarding the unauthorized transactions. According to the SEC’s orders of administrative proceedings, Bott made at least 2,000 principal transactions without disclosing or receiving permission from clients from 2009 to 2011. Furthermore, for each transaction, the broker-dealer affiliate bought mortgage-backed bonds with its inventory account and placed them in the client accounts. Bott gained almost half the $1.9 million in sales credits the firm received on the transactions. Vaughan and Payne executed similar trades and received similar benefits.

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:

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of individuals who invested with Lewis J. Hunter, a former broker in Michigan. A cease-and-desist and administrative proceedings order was recently instituted by the Securities and Exchange Commission against Hunter, who allegedly misappropriated money from his brokerage customers and, in turn, used the funds to pay personal expenses. The amount of money allegedly misappropriated is estimated to be around $300,000.

Victims of Lewis J. Hunter’s Fraud Could Recover Losses

The SEC’s Division of Enforcement’s allegations of misappropriation of funds state that Hunter promised guaranteed returns in both domestic and foreign bank investments while registered with HD Vest Investment Securities Inc. Further, the SEC’s claims allege that Hunter paid personal and business expenses with the funds and made false and misleading representations to conceal his actions from his clients. Reportedly, these misrepresentations included fabricating bank documents.

Based on the SEC’s allegations, securities arbitration lawyers believe that Hunter was a registered representative for HD Vest Investment Securities Inc. from November 15, 2006 through October 19, 2011. HD Vest Investment Securities is headquartered in Texas and is a registered broker-dealer. While registered there, Hunter reportedly became a partner in National Business Concepts LLC, purportedly in bookkeeping, accounting, business consulting, management and tax preparation.

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of their investment in Mewbourne Energy Partners or Mewbourne Oil. Based in Tyler, Texas, Mewbourne Energy Partners is, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-Q filing, an oil and gas development company.

Recovery of Private Placement Losses: Mewbourne Oil

Beginning May 1, 2007, Mewbourne Energy Partners has offered the public private placements, which certain Financial Industry Regulatory Authority registered broker-dealers then offered and sold, in order for Mewbourne to raise capital. The private placement offering consisted of general and limited partner interests and was a part of the Mewbourne Energy Partners ’07 Drilling Program. When the offering concluded on August 13, 2007, the total investor contributions, originally sold to accredited investors, amounted to $70,000,000. Of this total, accredited investors as limited partner interests amounted to $4,290,000 and accredited investors as general partner interests amounted to $65,710,000.

According to securities arbitration lawyers, private placements allow smaller companies to use the sale of debt securities or equities to raise capital without it becoming necessary for them to register these securities with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Because these investments are typically more complicated and carry more risk than other traditional investments, they are usually only suitable for sophisticated, high-net-worth investors.

Published on:

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating potential claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in Patriot Minerals. Patriot Minerals, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission Form D filing, is a San Antonio, Texas-based oil and gas exploration company. Patriot Minerals has several offerings of Regulation D private placements that are designed to generate capital for its offerings. These private placements include Tri-State Development Program and Patriot Minerals Arapaho. Certain Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)-registered broker-dealers offered and sold these private placements and, in some cases, may have done so inappropriately.

Investors of Patriot Minerals Private Placements Could Recover Losses

According to securities arbitration lawyers, private placements allow smaller companies to use the sale of debt securities or equities to raise capital without it becoming necessary for them to register these securities with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Because these investments are typically more complicated and carry more risk than other traditional investments, they are usually only suitable for sophisticated, high-net-worth investors.

Investment fraud lawyers say that because the creation and sale of private placements often carry high commissions, these investments continue to be pushed by brokerage firms despite the fact that they may be unsuitable for investors. FINRA 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.

Published on:

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in Texas Energy Exoro. Texas Energy Exoro’s Securities and Exchange Commission Form D filing states that it is an offering of Texas Energy Holdings, an oil and gas drilling company based in Dallas, Texas. The company offered the Regulation D private placement to raise capital, and certain Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)-registered broker-dealers offered and sold the private placement.

Investors Could Recover Texas Energy Exoro Private Placement Losses

According to securities fraud attorneys, private placements allow smaller companies to use the sale of debt securities or equities to raise capital without it becoming necessary for them to register these securities with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Because these investments are typically more complicated and carry more risk than other traditional investments, they are usually only suitable for sophisticated, high-net-worth investors.

Investment fraud lawyers say that because the creation and sale of private placements often carry high commissions, these investments continue to be pushed by brokerage firms despite the fact that they may be unsuitable for investors. FINRA 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.

Published on:

Securities arbitration lawyers are currently investigating potential claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investments in Lehman Return Optimization Security Note and Maluhia Eight LLC.

Investors of Lehman Return Optimization Security Note, Maluhia Eight Could Recover Losses Through Securities Arbitration

Lehman Return Optimization Security Notes were allegedly marketed by brokers as investments designed to guarantee safety much like the safety associated with “capital preservation.” Furthermore, they were marketed as “low-risk investment,” according to investment fraud lawyers. However, the investment’s safety was actually dependent upon the solvency of Lehman Brothers, which acted as the issuer of the note. Following Lehman Brother’s September 2008 declaration of bankruptcy, investments such as this one that were backed by Lehman Brothers suffered disastrous losses. The potential liability of brokerage firms that sold the note to investors is now being investigated.

Brokerage firm liability for a Hawaii real estate deal, Maluhia Eight LLC, is also under investigation by securities arbitration lawyers. Chapter 11 bankruptcy was declared by Maluhia Eight in 2010 in the Northern District of Texas. Many investors have suffered losses as a result of the declaration of bankruptcy, but investors who purchased Maluhia Eight because of an unsuitable recommendation may be able to recover losses.

Contact Information