Category Archives: Private Placements, Reg D Offerings

Failed deals in non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs) and private placements have plagued more investors in recent years, with problems ranging from suspension of share redemptions to inaccurate valuations to outright fraud. Such issues have garnered the attention of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), which is now investigating real estate developer Tony Thompson and his broker/dealer, TNP Securities LLC, for allegedly failing to turn over certain documents to FINRA.

By failing to turn over documents about his business to FINRA, Thompson is in violation of industry rules that require firms and individuals to produce information when asked to do so by FINRA.

As reported March 12 by Investment News, FINRA initially made inquiries regarding the documents two months ago. At the time, Thompson was attempting to “goose sales for a non-traded real estate investment trust, the $272 million TNP Strategic Retail Trust Inc.”

During that same month, Thompson sent a note to broker/dealers hawking the TNP Strategic Retail Trust and proclaiming that its net asset value was 6% higher than its share price. Specifically, Thompson’s note read: “Closing Feb. 7, 2013! Necessity retail: Now is the time!”

As the Investment News article points out, discrepancies between a REIT’s selling price and its NAV could be dilutive to current shareholders and provide brokers with a pitch laden with urgency to sell.

That’s not the only problem on Thompson’s plate, however. He’s also dealing with huge financial troubles, including the default on $21.5 million of private notes that he sold in 2008 and 2009 to raise money for Thompson National Properties LLC.  Last year, that venture suspended interest payments to investors in a private placement – i.e. the TNP 12 Percent Notes Program – that was designed to raise capital for the firm. Many of the investors in the TNP 12 Percent Notes Program reportedly were elderly, retired or conservative investors living on fixed incomes.

According to a July 10, 2012, article by Investment News, 22 independent broker/dealers had agreements to sell the notes, which required a minimum investment of $50,000. Brokers earned a 7% commission on sales of the notes, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

If you invested and suffered financial losses with Tony Thompson, the TNP 12 Percent Notes Program, Thompson National Properties LLC, TNP Securities, or TNP Strategic Retail Trust, contact us to tell your story.

Every year, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) takes note of key regulatory and examination issues that it plans to prioritize in the new year. In 2013, those priorities include a number of hot-button – and familiar – financial products, from structured investments, to non-traded REITs, to business development companies, or BDCs.

In a recent notice to investors, FINRA highlighted the following products and issues, along with an explanation as to why they merit top placement on FINRA’s 2013 watch list.

Structured Products: These products may be marketed to retail customers based on attractive initial yields and, in many cases, on the promise of some level of principal protection, according to FINRA. Moreover, structured products are often complex, and have cash-flow characteristics and risk-adjusted rates of return that are uncertain or hard to estimate. In addition, structured products generally do not have an active secondary market.

Suitability and Complex Products: FINRA’s recently revised suitability rule (FINRA Rule 2111) requires broker/dealers and associated persons to have a reasonable basis to believe a recommendation is suitable for a customer. FINRA says it is particularly concerned about firms’ and registered representatives’ understanding of complex or high-yield products, potential failures to adequately explain the risk-versus-return profile of certain products, as well as a disconnect between customer expectations and risk tolerances.

Business Development Companies (BDCs): BDCs are typically closed-end investment companies. Some BDCs primarily invest in the corporate debt and equity of private companies and may offer attractive yields generated through high credit risk exposures amplified through leverage. As with other high-yield investments – such as floating rate/leveraged loan funds, private REITs and limited partnerships – investors are exposed to significant market, credit and liquidity risks. In addition, fueled by the availability of low-cost financing, BDCs run the risk of over-leveraging their relatively illiquid portfolios, FINRA says.

Exchange-Traded Funds and Notes: In many instances, retail investors may not fully understand the differences among exchange-traded index products (i.e., funds, grantor trusts, commodity pools and notes) and the risks associated with these investments, particularly those that employ leverage to amplify returns. FINRA says it also is concerned about the proliferation of newly created index products that lack an established track record. Examples include products with valuations and performance tied to volatility, emerging markets and foreign currencies.

Non-Traded REITs: FINRA’s interest in non-traded REITs centers on the fact that many customers of non-traded REITs are unaware of the sales costs deducted from the offering price and the repayment of principal amounts as dividend payments in the early stages of a REIT program.

Private Placement Securities: Private placements will continue to be a key focus of FINRA’s investor protection efforts in 2013, with particular emphasis on sales and marketing efforts by broker/dealers. To improve its understanding of private placements, FINRA implemented Rule 5123, which requires member firms that sell an issuer’s securities in a private placement to individuals to file a copy of the offering document with FINRA.

FINRA also reminds member firms that the relative scarcity of independent financial information and the uncertainty surrounding the market- and credit-risk exposures associated with many private placements necessitates reasonable due diligence on prospective issuers. FINRA notes that due diligence should focus on the issuer’s creditworthiness, the validity and integrity of their business model, and the plausibility of expected rates of return as compared to industry benchmarks, particularly in light of the complex fee structures associated with many of these investments.

Independent broker/dealers continue to face a wave of legal and regulatory issues in 2013, with many expected to shutter their businesses.

As reported Jan. 20 by Investment News, the problems facing smaller B-Ds with 150 registered representatives or fewer include higher compliance costs, record low interest rates for money market accounts, competitive commission rates from large or discount broker-dealers and a tax increase that will cut available discretionary funds that investors can put to work in the stock market.

Small B-Ds make up the majority of firms registered with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).  In the first 11 months of 2012, pressures on the industry reduced the number of FINRA-registered firms to 4,319 – down 97 firms from the prior year and a 14% decline since the end of 2007.

Regulatory and compliance issues are a key factor contributing to the reduction in smaller B-Ds. In a move to improve investor protections, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved FINRA Rule 4524 in 2012, which mandated that broker/dealers file additional financial or operational schedules or reports as FINRA deemed necessary.

Many B-Ds to close up shop in the past few years have done so because of deals involving failed private placements, such as those connected to Provident Royalties LLC and Medical Capital Holdings LLC. The SEC charged both of those firms with fraud in July 2099, which in turn spurred a rash of investor lawsuits and arbitration claims. As a result, many broker/dealers were unable to contend with the litigation costs and subsequently shut down.

Doomed investment deals involving private placements have forced a number of broker/dealers to close their doors this year. Meanwhile, investors in those deals lost millions of dollars because in, many instances, the broker/dealer responsible for recommending the investments failed to perform their due diligence on the financial product they were touting.

As reported May 21 by Investment News, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is now taking a deeper look at “several areas of high risk” in the securities industry. That includes the due diligence of broker/dealers and their net capital levels.

“We’re looking at due diligence,” said Julius Leiman-Carbia, associate director in charge of the National Broker-Dealer Examination Program in the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, in the Investment News article. Leiman-Carbia, who participated in a panel discussion on Monday in Washington as part of the annual meeting of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), added that he wonders if brokers truly understand all of the products that they sell to clients.

In addition to focusing on due diligence, the SEC is examining “the division between the investment adviser and broker/dealer sides” of firms that are dually registered, including the various types of controls that exist when money is [placed with] the investment adviser.

The SEC also is looking at the country as a whole in an effort to pinpoint specific areas where investor fraud – especially elder financial fraud – is more prevalent.

The collapse of Medical Capital Holdings has led to numerous lawsuits and arbitration complaints by investors against the brokerages that failed to perform their due diligence before selling them private-placement investments in the troubled company. Now, for what is believed to be a first, an individual has been criminally charged with securities fraud for his role in selling Med Cap notes.

Nine counts of securities fraud were filed Feb. 23 by the Weld County District Attorney’s Office against John Brady Guyette. According to the Weld County complaint, the former Colorado stockbroker sold $1.3 million of Medical Capital investments to investors between August and December 2008. During that time, Medical Capital was showing signs trouble and had already missed several payments to investors in certain note offerings.

As reported Feb. 27 by Investment News, the focus of the complaint against Guyette concerns allegations that he sold Medical Capital notes to investors after the company failed to make payments to investors.

One of those investors is Lucille Linde, 92, who lost her life savings in Medical Capital investments. She began investing in Medical Capital and with Guyette in 2005. Three years later, in August 2008, she invested $300,000 in Medical Capital VI, says the Investment News article.

“Linde reported that prior to writing the checks on Aug. 15, 2008, [she] had been told by a fellow MedCap investor, Borge Villemsun, that MedCap had been late in making principal and interest payments to [him],” the complaint reads. “Linde reported confronting [Mr. Guyette] with this information. Linde reported that [Mr. Guyette] assured [her] that Villemsun had been paid and that the MedCap VI investment was guaranteed safe.

“Linde was not aware that when [she] wrote the checks on Aug. 15, 2008, MedCap II had failed to make principal and/or interest payments due to MedCap II investors. [Mr. Guyette] failed to disclose this information to Linde.”

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed fraud charges against Tustin-based Medical Capital Holdings in 2009, freezing its assets and appointing a receiver to oversee its financial books. A number of independent broker/dealers subsequently came under fire from regulators for failing to disclose key information about Medical Capital to investors.

Securities America was the independent broker/dealer subsidiary of Ameriprise. It was one of the broker/dealers of Medical Capital Investments, selling some $700 million of the private placements. In August 2011, the B-D was acquired by Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services Inc. for a reported $150 million in cash.

Information equals power, which is why securities regulators are encouraging investors to be aware about popular investment fraud scams so they don’t become a victim. One of the most popular vehicles for investment fraud includes unregistered securities such as private placements.

Also known as Regulation D offerings, private placements do not have to be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This means they often lack detailed financial information, as well as a prospectus.

In 2010 and 2011, an increase in investor complaints regarding private placements caused the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to launch a nationwide investigation of broker/dealers marketing and selling the products. As a result of the investigation, a number of fraud and sales practice abuses were uncovered. Two major cases involved Medical Capital Holdings and Provident Royalties.

Both entities were charged with fraud by the SEC in 2009. Since then, several broker/dealers that sold private placements in Medical Capital and Provident Royalties have faced enforcement actions, as well as fines by regulators. Meanwhile, investors are continuing to file lawsuits and arbitration claims over the failed deals.

As reported Dec. 14 by the Wall Street Journal, baby boomers are most vulnerable victims of investment scams involving private placements. Of the enforcements in 2010 for investors age 50 or older, cases involving unregistered securities outnumbered those related to ordinary stocks and bonds by a ratio of five to one, according to the North American Securities Administrators Association.

One of the victims of those crimes is Keith Grimes, 56. Grimes put $500,000 – his entire life savings – into an investment fund that promised returns of 14% to 24%. Described as having a manager with a successful track record of trading stocks and other financial products, the investment turned out to be a Ponzi scheme, in which money from new investors is used to pay returns to other investors.

The so-called manager of the fund in question was James D. Risher. On Dec. 6, Risher was sentenced to more than 19 years in federal prison. Meanwhile, Grimes, who lost almost all of his financial savings in the doomed deal, is now living in a borrowed mobile home and running an industrial-fiberglass business, according to the Wall Street Journal article.

According to the SEC, Risher raised $22 million from more than 100 investors, while placing only $2.5 million in brokerage accounts and losing about $890,000 through his trading. More than $8 million went to “management and performance fees,” with Risher spending $4.5 million on jewelry, gifts, property and personal expenses.

Soured investments in real estate deals and private placements involving Medical Capital and Provident Royalties have caused a number of broker/dealers to go belly up this year. Closures of broker/dealers, in fact, are outpacing new entrants into the market. Between May 2010 and May 2011, a total of 336 broker/dealers notified the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) that they were closing their doors for business. By comparison, 190 new B-Ds came on board.

And there appears to be more bad news ahead. As reported June 23 by Investment News, the Compliance Department predicts that the broker/dealer industry could see an 11% net loss of broker/dealers by 2014.

The dwindling number of broker/dealers came to a head this year, highlighted by the failures of such names as GunnAllen Financial, QA3 Financial Corporation and Jesup & Lamont Securities.

Other well known B-Ds like Securities America also have come under fire because of legal troubles connected to private-placement sales in Medical Capital Holdings and Provident Royalties. Both companies were charged with fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in July 2009.

Most recently, California-based MCL Financial Group filed its broker/dealer withdrawal form with FINRA. Last year, the receiver for bankrupt real estate syndicator DBSI sued MCL in an attempt to recover commissions generated from sales of tenant-in-common exchanges (TICs). According to court documents, MCL collected $210,000 in commissions from selling TICs issued by DBSI.

Earlier this month, WFP Securities of San Diego, California, also notified FINRA of its plans to shutter. WFP is facing more than $14 million in legal claims, after having sold more than $27 million of private placements issued by Medical Capital Holdings and $6.8 million issued by Provident Royalties.

The private-placement game is changing, thanks in large part to ongoing legal cases over failed private placements – also known as Reg D offerings – in Provident Royalties and Medical Capital Holdings. Both companies were charged with fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2009.

Major private-placement players like Securities America are feeling the ramifications of the issues involving Medical Capital and Provident Royalties – including a rash of lawsuits and arbitration claims filed by investors, as well as fraud charges issued by state securities regulators.

For some broker/dealers, the legal troubles stemming to Provident and Medical Capital, as well as to other failed private-placement offerings, have proven too much. Unable to sustain sufficient capital to fight their legal battles, many have gone out of business. Among the broker/dealers that have shuttered: Cullum & Burks Securities Inc., Securities Network, GunnAllen Financial, QA3 Financial Corp. and Jesup & Lamont Securities Corp., among others.

For the broker/dealers that do remain in the private-placement game, it’s likely they will see stricter oversight of the investments they market and sell to investors in the future. Just this week, the head of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) publicly called upon broker/dealers that sell private placements to engage in a more vigorous due diligence process, “pushing and pulling” for information about the products.

“We want to recognize where there’s limited disclosure and appears to be a speculative investment, you need to push to try to get more information,” said Richard Ketchum, chairman and chief executive of FINRA, at the regulator’s annual meeting in Washington

“It’s not good enough to go to a canned information session. You need to push and pull,” he said of the due diligence process for broker/dealers touting risking private-placement deals.

Embattled broker/dealer Securities America is crying foul as it faces Massachusetts securities regulators over claims of misleading investors who bought $7.2 million in Medical Capital private placements. The legal showdown began in earnest last week, when Securities America appeared at an administrative hearing to answer allegations brought in early 2010 that the broker/dealer failed to disclose potential red flags to both advisers and clients about Medical Capital.

Medical Capital is a Tustin, California, lender that issued private placements to purchase medical receivables. Securities America was one of Medical Capital’s biggest distributors, selling an estimated $700 million of the private placements from 2003 to 2008.

Meanwhile, investors reportedly lost more than $1 billion with their purchases of Medical Capital notes.

In July 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged Medical Capital and its two top executives with securities fraud. After raising $2.2 billion in capital, the firm is now in receivership. Regulators have since discovered that Medical Capital’s assets included not only medical receivables and loans but also a 118-foot yacht and a $20 million stake in the movie, “Perfect Game.”

As reported Oct. 4 by Investment News, the Securities America case is the first major legal battle involving an independent broker/dealer that sold private placements, or Regulation D offerings.

According to the lawsuit brought by Massachusetts regulators, Securities America deceived investors by allegedly representing MedCap notes as safe, secure and guaranteed, and never revealing the true nature of risk that the investments presented.

In addition, the lawsuit alleges that a due-diligence analyst at Securities America had serious concerns about Medical Capital, including the lack of audited financials for the series of private placement offerings. In 2005, Jim Nagengast, who was then Securities America’s president and current its chief executive officer, wrote in an e-mail that he, too, had issues about the lack of audited financials.

“Massachusetts investors were sold unsuitable, fraudulent notes by fraudulent means,” said Richard Khalife, an attorney for the Massachusetts Securities Division, in the Investment News article. “Unlawful conduct can’t go unpunished.”

Massachusetts isn’t the only regulator suing Securities America over sales of Medical Capital notes. In August, Montana regulators also sued Securities America, alleging that the firm and executives “withheld material information regarding heightened risks” from its representatives and their clients regarding notes issued by Medical Capital Holdings.

More than 40 other independent broker/dealers sold private placements in Medical Capital.

Maddox Hargett & Caruso P.C. continues to file arbitration claims with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) on behalf of investors who suffered investment losses in Medical Capital. If you purchased Medical Capital Notes from a broker/dealer and wish to discuss your potential rights for recovery, contact us.

Investor complaints regarding private placements – including those linked to Medical Capital Holdings – have prompted several state and federal investigations into the private placement sales practices of broker/dealers across the country. In many instances, the investigations have revealed a significant lack of regulatory compliance.

In response, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has published new guidance for FINRA-registered firms about their obligations when it comes to customer suitability, disclosures and other requirements for selling private placements to customers. Specifically, FINRA Regulatory Notice 10-22 reinforces and details a broker/dealer’s obligation to conduct a reasonable investigation of an issuer and the securities that are recommended in its offerings.

The Notice also highlights private placement red flags and supervisory requirements, and suggests practices to help ensure that firms adequately investigate the private placements that they recommend.

Private placements under Regulation D are usually sold to “accredited” investors and a limited number of non-accredited investors. While accredited investors must meet certain income or asset tests, the Notice emphasizes that a broker/dealer’s suitability obligations require it to conduct a reasonable investigation whenever it makes a recommendation in a private placement under Regulation D.

“An increase in investor complaints regarding private placements, as well as SEC actions halting sales of certain private placement offerings, led FINRA to launch a nationwide initiative that involves active examinations and investigations of broker-dealers engaged in retail sales of private placement interests,” said FINRA Chairman and CEO Rick Ketchum, in a statement.

“That initiative has uncovered misconduct, including fraud and sales practice abuses. While several enforcement actions have been taken and additional investigations are underway, FINRA is taking this opportunity to remind firms of their substantial duties when engaging in the sale of private placement offerings,” he said.

FINRA has brought three enforcement actions in recent months involving private placement offering violations. The actions include a complaint charging McGinn, Smith & Co. and its president with securities fraud in the sales of tens of millions of dollars in unregistered securities; the expulsion of Dallas-based Provident Asset Management for marketing a series of fraudulent private placement offered by an affiliate in a massive Ponzi scheme; and fines totaling $750,000 against Pacific Cornerstone Capital and its former CEO for failing to include complete information in private placement offering documents and marketing material, as well as for advertising violations and supervisory failures.