securities arbitration lawyer

Published on: July 10, 2013

UPS Employees with Leveraged, Concentrated Positions Could Recover Losses

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of UPS employees who suffered significant losses as a result of their concentrated position in UPS stock. A recent securities arbitration claim was filed with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s Office of Dispute Resolution on behalf of one investor against Wells Fargo Advisors, seeking damages of $4,000,000.

The claim alleges that the claimant, a 40-year employee of UPS, acquired more than 234,000 shares of UPS stock through the company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Manager’s Incentive Program. A Hypothecation Loan was allegedly opened to facilitate the purchase of the stock, which was used as collateral for the loan. Reportedly, the investor reached a Note and Security Agreement with Wells Fargo when he moved his hypo loan to the firm.

Allegedly, Wells Fargo did not recommend a risk management strategy, such as a protective put and/or collar in order to protect the investor’s leveraged, concentrated position. Meanwhile, Wells Fargo used the UPS stock as collateral for loans to the investor. When UPS’ stock suffered a significant decline that dropped its value well below the loan-to-value ratio, the collateral call on the loan could have been prevented by a protective put option or collar. However, Wells Fargo allegedly facilitated borrowing against the investor’s concentrated stock position, while it was unprotected by a risk management strategy, in an effort to make money.

Published on: June 27, 2013

CommonWealth REIT Shareholders Asked to Remove Directors; Investors Could Recover Losses

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses in the CommonWealth REIT. Investigations into the CommonWealth REIT began when allegations were made in a lawsuit filed by an investor in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts regarding false and misleading statements about the REIT’s prospects and financial standings that were allegedly made between January 10, 2012 and August 8, 2012. Investigations continue in light of a recent letter sent in June 2013 urging shareholders to vote for the removal of all of the REIT’s directors.

CommonWealth REIT Shareholders Asked to Remove Directors; Investors Could Recover Losses

The letter was sent by Corvex Management LP and Related Fund Management LLC. Corvex and Related are separately managed investment funds. Together, they own around 9.6 percent of all outstanding CommonWealth REIT common shares.

The letter from Corvex and Related states: “An outdated management structure, abysmal corporate governance, and mismanagement of operations have in our view been a significant driver in the 45 percent decline in CommonWealth REIT’s stock price over the last five years. We believe this continued value destruction is by design — the direct result of self-interested actions taken by CommonWealth’s current Board of Trustees and its external manager, REIT Management and Research LLC (RMR) which is owned by Barry Portnoy and his son, Adam.”

Published on: June 20, 2013

JP Morgan Policy Allegedly Conflicted with Best Interest of Customers

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of customers of JP Morgan Securities LLC. At issue is whether the customers received recommendations that were unsuitable or not in their best interest because of a JP Morgan policy that conflicted with brokers’ responsibilities to their customers.

JP Morgan Policy Allegedly Conflicted with Best Interest of Customers

According to a securities arbitration claim filed by a former JP Morgan broker, the firm allegedly “had a policy to only recommend in-house product to customers, irrespective of whether that product was the best choice for customers to meet their investment objectives.” Furthermore, the firm continued to discourage the selling of outside products by allegedly making it difficult for brokers to collect commissions and fees for those products. In addition, the claim alleges that the firm’s continuing insistence on the sales of proprietary mutual funds created a perpetual conflict between the firm’s policies and a broker’s responsibility to his or her clients.

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority rules have established that 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 alleged practices of JP Morgan would have discouraged and/or made it difficult for brokers to act in the best interest of their clients.

Published on: June 13, 2013

Customers of Blake B. Richards, Ameriprise, LPL Could Recover Losses

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of Ameriprise Financial and LPL Financial customers. Recently, the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission charged Blake B. Richards, a former LPL and Ameriprise Advisor Services advisor, with fraud. Allegedly, Richards misappropriated funds from a minimum of six individuals, amounting to around $2 million.

According to the SEC, at least two of Richards’ victims are elderly and most of the allegedly misappropriated funds were life insurance proceeds and/or retirement savings.

“Since at least 2008, on occasions when investors informed Richards that they had funds available to invest (such as from an IRA rollover or proceeds from a life insurance policy), Richards instructed the investors to write out checks to an entity called ‘Blake Richards Investments,’ a d/b/a entity, or another d/b/a used by Richards, ‘BMO Investments,'” the SEC’s complaint states. “Richards represented to the investors that he would invest their funds through his investment vehicle in life insurance, fixed income assets, variable annuities, or household-name stocks. Richards misappropriated much of the funds.”

Published on: May 28, 2013

American Capital Agency, American Capital Mortgage REIT Investors Could Recover Losses

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses in two mortgage REITs, American Capital Agency and American Capital Mortgage, following the announcement of 2013 first-quarter results. For the first quarter of 2013, American Capital Mortgage suffered losses of $0.56 per share and American Capital Agency suffered losses of $1.57 per share.

American Capital Agency, American Capital Mortgage REIT Investors Could Recover Losses

Reportedly, these losses are a result of increasing interest rates combined with a drop in mortgage-backed securities values and the secondary offering’s failure to foresee these changes. However, mortgage REITs, or real estate investment trusts, are not suitable for all investors. Prior to recommending an investment to a client, brokers and firms 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.

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority rules have established that firms have an obligation to fully disclose all the risks of a given investment when making recommendations. Furthermore, securities arbitration lawyers say brokerage firms must, before approving an investment’s sale to a customer, conduct a reasonable investigation of the securities and issuer.

Published on: May 23, 2013

VSR Financial Services Customers Could Recover Losses

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of doing business with VSR Financial Services and/or Michael David Shaw, a financial advisor. Allegedly, Shaw and VSR Financial Services may have engaged in misconduct in connection with the sales of REITs, alternative investments, hedge funds and private placements.

Title of the Post Goes Here

Reportedly, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority accepted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent on May 15, 2013 from VSR Financial Services. In the letter, the firm agreed to pay a fine of $550,000 which will settle allegations that the firm failed to adequately supervise the sales of alternative investments to customers. In particular, the firm allegedly failed to supervise the concentration of these investments in customer portfolios.

In addition, securities arbitration lawyers say that in October 2011, a trader calling himself Michael Daniel Shaw submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent. In this letter he consented to the findings that he had recommended the sale of private placements, which were high-risk, to customers for whom he did not have a reasonable basis to believe they were suitable transactions. Furthermore, Shaw allegedly made material omissions or misrepresentations regarding the purchase or sales of the private placements.

Published on: May 14, 2013

Broker-dealers’ Info Regarding Non-traded REITs is Inadequate, FINRA Says

by InvestorLawyers

Earlier this month, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) issued a notice to broker-dealers stating that in some cases, they have not provided adequate service to investors in several areas, including the distribution of materials containing inaccurate and misleading statements related to non-traded real estate investment trusts, or REITs. Many securities arbitration claims have been filed by stock fraud lawyers on behalf of investors that cite similar claims.

The way in which investors receive dividends, or distributions, is one matter that is of concern to securities arbitration lawyers. One of the most attractive reasons for many investors to purchase non-traded REITs is the fact that they begin paying distributions immediately after sale. According to the FINRA notice, however, communications from broker-dealers to investors “have emphasized the distributions paid by a real estate program and failed to adequately explain that some of the distribution constitutes return of principal.”

FINRA also stated that “some communications have not provided sufficient discussions of the risks associated with investing in the products in order to balance the presentation of benefits.” Numerous claims have, in fact, been made alleging independent broker-dealers such as Ameriprise Financial Services Inc. and LPL Financial LLC did not adequately disclose the risks of non-traded REITs to investors prior to purchase. According to stock fraud lawyers, some investors are also not made aware that distribution payments can stop at any time.

Published on: May 9, 2013

Securities Fraud: John Thomas Financial Investors Could Recover Losses

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of conducting business with Anastasios “Tommy” Belesis and other representatives of John Thomas Financial Inc. Specifically, investors in Liberty Silver Corp. and America West Resources Inc. may be eligible to recover their losses. In January of 2013, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority issued a Wells Notice to Belesis, the CEO of John Thomas Financial. Allegedly, Belesis was part of a pump-and-dump scheme involving Liberty Silver Corp.

Title of the Post Goes Here

A FINRA statement alleged that Mr. Belesis “(1) willfully or recklessly sold a substantial portion of a firm proprietary position while failing to execute customer orders to sell shares of the same stock, at prices that would have satisfied the unexecuted customer orders; (2) failed to follow instructions by the customers to sell the shares; (3) used manipulative, deceptive and/or fraudulent means to artificially inflate the price of the stock; (4) made material misrepresentations, to customers, registered representatives and FINRA, about the reasons why the customer orders had not been executed; (5) falsified or failed to preserve the orders in question and other pertinent records; and (6) failed to reasonably supervise the receipt, documentation and execution of the customer orders.” Securities arbitration lawyers are conducting their own investigation into the sales practices of John Thomas Financial, based on FINRA’s claims.

Bloomberg reported that Belesis has also been accused of fraud related to America West Resources Inc. According to FINRA, John Thomas Financial raised $20 million for America West from 2008 to 2011. Investment fraud lawyers say that when America West stock rose significantly in February 2012, Belesis allegedly prevented customers from selling their shares while he instructed an employee to sell the firm’s stock, gaining the firm over $1 million in proceeds. John Thomas Financial allegedly attempted to disguise the alleged fraud by “losing” the customer order tickets. Currently, no decision has been made in this case.

Published on: April 30, 2013

Recovery of Apple REIT Losses Still Possible Through Arbitration

by InvestorLawyers

Investors are disappointed, to say the least, that a federal judge recently dismissed an investor class action lawsuit related to the sale of Apple REITs by David Lerner Associates Inc. However, stock fraud lawyers say that this decision will have absolutely no impact on arbitration cases filed against Lerner with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

Title of the Post Goes Here

In May 2011, a complaint was filed against Lerner by FINRA, regarding the firm’s Apple REIT marketing practices. In October 2012, FINRA ordered Lerner to pay $2.3 million for allegedly overcharging clients who had purchased other securities. Lerner was also ordered to pay $12 million to the trust investors. Founder and chief executive, David Lerner, was barred for one year from the securities industry and fined $250,000.

The class action raised allegations that Lerner breached fiduciary duty, was unjustly enriched and negligent in the sale of over $6.8 billion in Apple REITs. Though the class action has been dismissed by a federal judge, Lerner still faces many arbitration claims alleging the unsuitable recommendation of Apple REITs. According to securities arbitration lawyers, the question of misrepresentation is completely different than the question of suitability. Even if an investment firm adequately discloses all the risks of the investment, the investment must still be suitable for each investor receiving the recommendation given their age, investment objectives and risk tolerance. Furthermore, in some cases oral misrepresentations at the time of sale- which were not at issue in the class action- can be a basis for liability in a FINRA arbitration if a stockbroker misrepresented the nature of an investment to a customer.

Published on: April 25, 2013

Morgan Stanley Broker Allegedly Traded on Customer Accounts without Permission

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of customers of Morgan Stanley and other full-service brokerage firms who were the victim of unauthorized trading or discretionary trading on a non-discretionary account without receiving prior written authorization.

145925895REIT_Investors_May_be_Unaware_They_Suffered_Significant_Losses

According to FINRA’s discretionary rule, “No member or registered representative shall exercise any discretionary power in a customer’s account unless such customer has given prior written authorization to a stated individual or individuals and the account has been accepted by the member, as evidenced in writing by the member or the partner, officer or manager, duly designated by the member, in accordance with Rule 3010.” However, according to securities arbitration lawyers, this rule doesn’t stop all brokers.

As an example, James Harman McNeill, a Morgan Stanley broker, recently was cited for unsolicited trades and discretion. Allegedly, McNeill violated FINRA Rule 2010 in November 2011 when he exercised discretionary power in Morgan Stanley customer accounts without receiving written authorization prior to doing so. Furthermore, later that month McNeill allegedly marked non-traditional Exchange Traded Fund purchase orders as “unsolicited” even though they were solicited, according to the allegations listed in the Letter of Acceptance, Wavier and Consent that was submitted in March of this year. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority imposed a 9-month suspension and a $15,000 fine upon McNeill. According to investment fraud lawyers, mis-marked tickets can raise issues regarding inaccurate books and determining if a broker made an unsuitable recommendation.