Español Inner

Articles Posted in FINRA

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in a collateralized debt obligation (CDO) from Mizuho Securities USA. Mizuho Securities USA and three of its former employees were recently charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission with misleading investors in a CDO through the use of “dummy assets” which inflated the credit ratings of the deal.

SEC Charges Mizuho Securities USA; CDO Investors Could Recover Losses

According to the complaint filed by the SEC, Mizuho Securities made around $10 million in marketing and structuring fees through the deal. The firm has agreed to settle the SEC’s charges by paying $127.5 million. The SEC’s allegations state that Mizuho marketed and structured a CDO, Delphinus CDO 2007-1, which was backed by subprime bonds, when signs of severe distress were being exhibited by the housing market. Allegedly, when Mizuho employees realized the CDO would not be able to satisfy a rating agency’s criteria meant to protect investors of CDOs from rating downgrade uncertainties, they submitted a portfolio which contained dummy assets amounting to millions of dollars. This portfolio inaccurately reflected the CDO’s collateral. Once this inaccurate portfolio was rated, the transaction was closed and Mizuho sold the notes to investors. The CDO defaulted in 2008 and was liquidated in 2010.

“This case demonstrates once again that bankers and market participants who embrace a ‘get the deal done at all costs’ strategy will be identified, charged and punished,” says the director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, Robert Khuzami.

Published on:

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of the customers of JPMorgan Chase, specifically investors of Chase Strategic Portfolios and JPMorgan Chase proprietary mutual funds. Reportedly, when JPMorgan acquired Washington Mutual, the firm’s advisors may have engaged in improper mutual fund switching.

Investors of Chase Strategic Portfolio, other JPMorgan Chase Proprietary Mutual Funds Could Recover Losses

Last month, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other regulators reportedly initiated inquiries into the fund sales practices of JPMorgan. A recognized fund researcher, Morningstar, reported that around 42 percent of JPMorgan’s funds did not surpass the average performance of similar funds over the past three years. Furthermore, a New York Times article published last month stated that JPMorgan financial advisors were allegedly “encouraged, at times, to favor JPMorgan’s own products even when competitors had better-performing or cheaper options.” Investment fraud lawyers’ investigations will establish whether the firm or its advisors can be held responsible for investor losses that resulted because of improper sales practices.

The Chase Strategic Portfolio is reportedly one of the main products that has been pushed by JPMorgan. The investment is made up of a combination of around 15 mutual funds. Some of these funds are developed by JPMorgan. Securities fraud attorneys say the Chase Strategic Portfolio is designed to allow ordinary investors access to holdings in stocks and bonds, with varying levels of risk, accomplished through the use of six main models. The fund was launched in 2008 and reportedly has around $20 billion in assets. Chase Strategic Portfolio carries an annual fee on assets of 1.6 percent, but also includes a fee on underlying JPMorgan funds. The aforementioned New York Times article also stated that the actual annual return of the fund after fees was 13.87 percent per year, which trailed the hypothetical 15.39 percent return included in the marketing materials.

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers encourage investors to read the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)’s new Investor Alert, which was announced on July 10. This alert, titled “Exchange-traded Notes — Avoid Unpleasant Surprises,” is meant to help investors become more informed of the risks and features of exchange-traded notes, or ETNs. This investor alert can help investors make smart decisions about investing in ETNs. And if you’ve already invested in an ETN, it can also help you determine if you were unsuitably recommended exchange-traded notes by your broker or adviser.

FINRA Alert: Exchange-traded Notes

ETNs are, according to the FINRA alert, a type of debt security that trades on exchanges and promises a return that is linked to a market index or some other benchmark. Unlike exchange-traded funds (ETFs), however, exchange-traded notes don’t replicate or approximate the performance of that index through the purchase or holding of assets. According to stock fraud lawyers, brokers have been known to sell ETFs and ETNs as conservative ways to track a sector of the market or the market as a whole. However, complicated trading strategies are necessary to accomplish this, and using these investments to track a sector of the market, even if valid, may or may not be a conservative trading strategy. FINRA wants investors to be aware of the fact that an ETN’s market price can deviate from its indicative value, and in some cases this deviation is significant.

FINRA’s Vice President for Investor Education, Gerri Wals, stated that “ETNs are complex products and can carry a raft of risks. Investors considering ETNs should only invest if they are confident the ETN can help them meet their investment objectives and they full understand and are comfortable with the risks.”

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers are currently investigating potential claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in Woodlark Capital. Woodlark Capital LLC is, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission Form D filing, a real estate company based in New York. In 2007, the company applied for a Form D Notice of Sale of Securities in order to generate capital. Certain Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)-registered broker-dealers offered and sold these private placements.

Woodlark Capital Investment Private Placement Investors 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.

Stock 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 fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in ETR Pasco Fund II. ETR Pasco Fund II is, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission Form D filing, a real estate company based in Miami, Florida. Sometime between late 2006 and early 2007, ETR Pasco Fund II applied for a Form D Notice of Sale of Securities in order to generate capital. Certain Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)-registered broker-dealers then offered and sold these private placements.

Investors of ETR Pasco Fund II Private Placement Could Recover Losses

According to stock fraud 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.

They also tend to carry high commissions. Securities fraud attorneys say that because the creation and sale of private placements often carry such 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 fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in Accoona Corp. Inc. Accoona serves as an online multi-lingual business portal and search engine through its operation as a website, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission Form D filing. It is primarily designed to help chambers of commerce, small- and medium-sized businesses and governments publicize information to other businesses. In order to raise capital, Accoona offered a Regulation D private placement. Reportedly, this private placement was offered and sold by certain broker-dealers that were registered with FINRA.

Accoona Corp. Investors 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.

Securities fraud attorneys 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. 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.

Published on:

Stock fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered losses as a result of their investment in Dividend Capital Total Realty Trust Inc. Dividend Capital Total Realty Trust was formed on April 11, 2005 and is a Maryland corporation, according to its filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Dividend Capital is located in Denver, Colorado and was designed to invest in a diverse portfolio of real estate-related and real property investments. The targeted investments of the company include direct investments that consist of high-quality retail, industrial, multi-family and other properties. The properties are primarily located in North America. The company also targets securities investments that include mortgage loans which are secured by income-producing real estate, and those issued by other real estate companies.

Dividend Capital Total Realty Trust Non-traded REIT Investors Could Recover Losses

Securities arbitration lawyers believe that secondary market offers indicate that Dividend Capital Total Realty Trust’s value has appeared to have substantially declined.

Non-traded REIT investments like the Dividend Capital Total Realty Trust typically offer commissions between 7-10 percent, which is significantly higher than traditional investments like mutual funds and stocks. In some cases, the commission generated by these investments can be as high as 15 percent. This higher commission can explain why brokerage firms are motivated to recommend these investments despite their possible unsuitability.

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:

David Lerner Associates is in the spotlight once again as it is threatened by charges alleging that the company and its principle, David Lerner, deceived customers — many of whom were elderly, unsophisticated investors. David Lerner, 75, is surrounded by controversy regarding 20 years of real estate investment sales. As a result of his alleged misdeeds, an abundance of complaints, regulatory sanctions and litigation have been left in his wake. Lerner has used seminars and radio to sell shares of a Virginia-based Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) that, in turn, invests in extended-stay hotels. Stock fraud lawyers and industry regulators say that David Lerner Associates has sold shares of Apple REIT amounting to almost $7 billion, in 120,000 customer accounts, since 1992. Those sales have generated a staggering $600 million in fees.

News: David Lerner Associates to Face FINRA Panel in September

Furthermore, according to FINRA’s complaint, David Lerner Associates allegedly earns 10 percent from the Apple REIT offerings, and that these fees account for 60-70 percent of the firm’s business since 1996. The complaint also alleges that the firm is “targeting unsophisticated and elderly customers” while making false claims and omissions about market values, investment returns, prospects and performance of the REIT.

Investment fraud lawyers say that sales strategies employed by the 350 or more brokers employed by Lerner include mailings, cold calls and seminars at hotels, restaurants, country clubs and senior centers. Lerner is also known in New York and Florida for his spots on an AM radio station.

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.

Contact Information