VEREIT (formerly known as American Realty Capital Properties) is one of the largest real estate investment trusts (REITs) in the world. VEREIT was founded in 2010 and is based in Phoenix, Arizona.

In the complaint Vanguard alleges that VEREIT cost investors billions of dollars in a multiyear accounting fraud. From February 2013 to July 2014 VEREIT implemented an “acquisition strategy” purchasing seven major real estate companies at an average of $3 billion. VEREIT’s assets grew from $132 million to $21.3 billion in 2014. During this growth VEREIT allegedly assured investors that its internal controls “were effective” and that the company financial statements “were accurate and could be trusted.”

Investors allege that VEREIT actually did not have an adequate system of controls over its financial reporting and that company financial statements were “riddled with errors.” According to the complaint VEREIT hid its fraud from investors until Oct. 29, 2014 when it disclosed an audit report which “determined that the company ‘intentionally’ misreported and [had] ‘intentionally not corrected’ certain calculations and that prior statements by the company ‘should no longer be relied upon.” After the revelation VEREIT’s stock price fell by 36%.

Non-traded REITs, like VEREIT, carry greater risk than more traditional investments such as stocks and bonds. Because of the greater risk attached to these investments, they are better suited for sophisticated and institutional investors. Broker-dealers have the duty to conduct proper due diligence in order to determine if an investment is suitable for a customer. This includes looking at the investors age, risk tolerance, net worth and investment experience.

If you believe you have been the victim of a possible violation of the securities laws, you may wish to consult an attorney to find out more about your legal rights and options. Investors may contact a securities attorney at Law Office of Christopher J. Gray at (866) 966-9598 or newcases@investorlawyers.net for a no-cost, confidential consultation.

Intrade operates an online “prediction market” trading website through which customers buy or sell what are technically options contracts enabling customers to wager whether certain events will occur. The subject matters of the wagers range from political elections to whether NASA will announce the discovery of extraterrestrial life. Certain of the Intrade contacts, including

Bettors who predict that an event will occur buy shares in Intrade, and those who predict the event will not occur sell shares. If the event occurs, bettors who bought shares receive $10. If the event does not occur, bettors who sold shares must pay $10. The “price” of each share represents the percentage likelihood of an event occurring based on the collective wisdom of all bettors in a particular options contract or wager.

The CFTC alleges that some of these options contracts or wagers are illegal as to U.S. customers because they represent off-exchange options trading that violates CFTC regulations. The CFTC also seeks to recover disgorgement of sums by which Intrade was enriched as a result of facilitating allegedly illegal off-exchange options transactions. Intrade affiliate Trade Exchange Network also allegedly was the subject of a 2005 CFTC order specifically listing as examples of banned options such contracts as the daily crude oil contract, gold futures, light sweet crude oil futures and the intraday euro versus U.S. dollar rate contract,

Violations of the Commodities Exchange Act can provide the basis for recovery of damages for private plaintiffs who file their own lawsuits, either individually or as a class action. Intrade customers who wish to explore possible legal claims arising out of Intrade’s alleged violations of the Commodities Exchange Act may contact Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C. for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. 12.11.26 INTRADE COMPLAINT

This new disturbing information has given rise to rampant speculation that MF Global diverted customer funds in order to meet margin calls arising from its own losing proprietary trades in European debt instruments.

This news came only one day after the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) initiated the liquidation of MF Global Inc., under the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA) and filed an application with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for a declaration that the customers of MF Global Inc. are in need of the protections available under the SIPA.

Orlan Johnson, board chairman of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), reportedly said: “When the customers of a failed SIPC member brokerage firm have left their securities in the custody of that firm, SIPC acts as quickly as possible to protect those customers. In this case, SIPC initiated the liquidation proceeding within hours of being notified by the SEC that a SIPC case was necessary to protect the investing public.”

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission issued a joint statement stating in part as follows:

For several days, the SEC, CFTC and other regulators had been closely monitoring developments affecting MF Global, Inc., a jointly registered futures commission merchant and broker-dealer, in anticipation of a transaction that would include the transfer of customer accounts to another firm. Early this morning, MF Global informed the regulators that the transaction had not been agreed to and reported possible deficiencies in customer futures segregated accounts held at the firm. The SEC and CFTC have determined that a SIPC-led bankruptcy proceeding would be the safest and most prudent course of action to protect customer accounts and assets.

If MF Global deliberately diverted customer funds, this conduct may give rise to claims under the Commodities Exchange Act on behalf of customers whose funds were diverted. Investors who lost money in MF Global securities may also wish to consult an attorney concerning possible claims. To date, apparently no class actions have yet been filed.

Investors who believe that they bought MF Global securities (including a bond issue that occurred during August 2011) without being fully informed concerning MF Global’s business condition, risk profile and proprietary trading exposures may wish to consider consulting an attorney to explore whether they may have a viable claim. Investors who believe their money held in MF Global accounts may have been diverted may also have viable claims. Investors may contact the Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C. for a confidential, no-cost consultation.

MF Global’s bankrupty filing is reportedly the seventh-largest bankruptcy by assets in U.S. history.

Regulators had expressed “grave concerns” about the viability of MF Global, which filed for bankruptcy only after “no viable alternative was available in the limited time leading up to the regulators’ deadline,” the company’s COO, Bradley Abelow, said in a court filing. The Company’s board reportedly worked all weekend attempting to find a buyer for the firm, in an episode remniscent of the collapse of the former Lehman Brothers Holdings.

The bankruptcy filing let MF Global’s 2,870 employees, as well as trading counterparties, in limbo, and also reportedly disrupted trading in futures contracts on gold, crude oils and grains because MF Global customers and personnel were prevented from trading.

The value of MF Global’s stock and other securities has also plummeted in value.

Investors who believe that they bought MF Global securities (including a bond issue that occurred during August 2011) without being fully informed concerning MF Global’s business condition, risk profile and proprietary trading exposures may wish to consider consulting an attorney to explore whether they may have a viable claim. Investors may contact the Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C. for a confidential, no-cost consultation.