Securities Fraud

Published on: August 8, 2013

GenSpring Clients Could Recover Losses

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses in their accounts with GenSpring Family Offices LLC, a firm owned by a wholly-owned SunTrust subsidiary. Reportedly, arbitration cases have already been filed on behalf of ultra-high-net-worth investors which allege mishandling of investment accounts by GenSpring.

GenSpring Clients Could Recover Losses

In one case, the investors’ trust interviewed multiple money managers and investment firms including Credit Sussie, CitiGroup, Deutsche Bank, LaSalle Bank and Goldman Sachs. All of these firms recommended diversification across traditional asset classes, such as bonds and equities, as well as selective investments in alternative products for special situations.

However, the claim asserts that GenSpring stood out because of its unique approach which would provide better downside protection and better returns through the use of Multi-Strategy Hedge Funds, such as Silver Creek Funds, instead of the bond or fixed income portion of client portfolios. Allegedly, GenSpring officials claimed that their approach, which had been tested thoroughly, would behave like traditional bonds in terms of asset class correlation and volatility while providing returns across all market cycles that were superior to traditional bonds. The trust invested approximately $10 million and stated its primary goal as capital preservation.

Published on: July 30, 2013

Investors Could Recover ATP Oil and Gas Note Losses

by InvestorLawyers

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses in ATP Oil and Gas 11.875 Percent Senior Second Lien Exchange Notes. The investigation is regarding whether customers received unsuitable recommendations of the ATP Notes from their full service brokerage firm or advisor.

Reportedly, a class action lawsuit was filed on May 24, 2013, on behalf of investors who acquired ATP Notes that can be traced to the company’s exchange of $1.6 billion in notes that occurred on December 16, 2010. According to the complaint, the company allegedly concealed two moratoriums while issuing the ATP Notes. These moratoriums were issued by the U.S. Department of Interior and regarded deep water drilling. Reportedly, the drilling devastated the revenues of the company, which filed for bankruptcy on August 17, 2012.

According to stock fraud lawyers, ATP Oil and Gas 11.875 Percent Senior Second Lien Exchange Notes were speculative investments that carried a very high risk. As a result, they were not suitable for investors with conservative portfolios, low risk tolerances or those seeking fixed income.

Published on: July 25, 2013

Wells Fargo Ordered to Pay Investor $2.8 Million

by InvestorLawyers

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of Wells Fargo Advisors LLC customers in light of a recent arbitration award regarding the firm’s alleged failure to detect theft and fraudulent transactions in a customer’s account. On July 3, 2013, a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel ordered Wells Fargo to pay an investor $2.8 million for the alleged failures.

Wells Fargo Ordered to Pay Investor $2.8 Million

The case was filed by a family limited partnership, College Health and Investment Ltd., in 2010. According to stock fraud lawyers, many wealthy families use family limited partnerships as an estate planning tool to minimize certain tax liabilities and preserve assets.

Reportedly, College Health filed a lawsuit in 2010 against Esther Spero. Spero allegedly forged the signatures of the family limited partnership’s employees who had authorization to transfer funds so that she could make transfers out of the accounts for her personal use. A $21 million judgement was entered in October, 2010, against Spero. Allegedly, Spero operated the scheme through multiple entities, including Wells Fargo.

Published on: July 23, 2013

Scottrade Fined for Alleged Failure to Supervise $8.4 Million in Sales of Unregistered Stock

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of the customers of James W. Margulies and Scottrade Inc. in light of a recent Financial Industry Regulatory Authority decision. Reportedly, Scottrade has agreed to pay a fine of $100,000 to FINRA for failing to supervise Margulies, the former Industrial Enterprises of America Inc. chief financial officer, general counsel and board member.

Scottrade Fined for Failure to Supervise 8.4 Million in Sales of Unregistered Stock

Reportedly, Margulies was allowed to improperly sell unregistered stock to investors between February 2005 and October 2007. Securities arbitration lawyers say he reportedly sold $8.4 million worth of unregistered stock. According to FINRA, “Scottrade failed to conduct an independent inquiry to determine whether the shares deposited were freely tradable.”

According to investment fraud lawyers, Margulies was convicted in 2011 of stealing more than $20 million from investors and looting over $90 million in illegally-issued securities by the Manhattan district attorney. He reportedly used more than $7 million of that money for luxury items such as jewelry for his wife, a vacation club membership, expensive homes and travel on a private jet.

Published on: July 18, 2013

UBS Allegedly Made Unsuitable Recommendation of Lehman Structured Products

by InvestorLawyers

Investment fraud lawyers are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of the unsuitable recommendation of Lehman structured products. Recently, a securities arbitration claim was filed on behalf of a couple who did business with UBS Financial Services Inc. The FINRA arbitration was filed against UBS Financial Services and alleges the improper and unsuitable sale of Lehman structured products.

UBS Allegedly Made Unsuitable Recommendation of Lehman Structured Products

According to the Statement of Claim, the couple was nearing retirement and, therefore, wanted to preserve and protect their savings. Allegedly, they were presented with a written financial plan by UBS Financial Services that recommended an allocation of 52 percent equities and 46 percent fixed income for their “moderate” objectives and risk tolerance.

However, securities arbitration lawyers say the claim alleges that UBS disregarded the recommended allocation and concentrated the couple’s accounts in structured products and notes and equities for the “fixed income” portion. These investments allegedly included Lehman structured products, which UBS was aware carried significant default risk.

Published on: July 9, 2013

Clients of Barry George Hartman, Rocky Mountain Financial, Could Recover Losses for Alleged Unsuitable Recommendations of REITs

by InvestorLawyers

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of investors who suffered significant losses as a result of doing business with Rocky Mountain Financial LLC, FSC Securities Corporation and Barry George Hartman. Some of Hartman’s clients have alleged that he made unsuitable recommendations of high-risk securities, such as AIG stock, and committed sales practice violations regarding non-traded REITs, or Real Estate Investment Trusts.

According to stock fraud lawyers, some non-traded REITs may have carried a high commission, which in the past has motivated brokers to recommend the product to investors despite the investment’s unsuitability. The commission on a non-traded REIT is often as high as 15 percent. Many non-traded REITs carry a relatively high dividend or high interest, making them attractive to investors. However, non-traded REITs are inherently risky and illiquid, which causes them to be unsuitable for many investors.

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 his or her age, investment objectives and risk tolerance. Furthermore, securities fraud attorneys say brokerage firms must, before approving an investment’s sale to a customer, conduct a reasonable investigation of the securities and issuer.

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: June 11, 2013

ProEquities Investors Could Recover Losses for Inappropriate Sale of Non-traded REITs

by InvestorLawyers

Securities fraud attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of customers of ProEquities Inc. Allegedly, ProEquities has engaged in the inappropriate sale of speculative and illiquid investments, including non-traded REITs.

ProEquities Investors Could Recover Losses for Inappropriate Sale of Non-traded REITs

In one recent claim, a couple from Minnesota read an ad in the newspaper that reportedly contained the words “Retirement” and “Safe.” After reading this ad, they attended a seminar, during which an advisor for ProEquities reportedly used the catchphrases “no stock market risk” and “retirement income – net of fees and expenses.” He allegedly emphasized investments that supposedly avoided exposure to the stock market and risk.

Following the seminar, stock fraud lawyers say the couple followed the advice of the advisor. They invested the majority of their savings according to the ProEquities advisor’s ongoing advice. The investments they made turned out to be highly speculative and illiquid non-traded REITs. ProEquities sold the couple the following products: Behringer Harvard Multifamily REIT I, Behringer Harvard REIT I, ATEL Growth Capital Fund III and LEAF Equipment Leasing Income Fund III.