Private Placements

Non-Traded REITs, Structured Products, and Private Placements Remain Under Regulator Scrutiny

Published on: July 7, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to state regulators, non-traded real estate investment trusts, structure products, and private placements, are some of the financial instruments that the states and insurance regulators are watching closely. First Deputy Commissioner of the Iowa Insurance Division Jim Mumford and Alabama Securities Commission director Joseph P. Borg recently spoke at a panel at the Insured Retirement Institute’s Government, Legal and Regulatory Conference.

Borg noted that a growing number of agents are now selling unlicensed financial products, with insurance agents selling private placements and getting clients away from insurance products and into Regulation 506 of Regulation D. The rule establishes a safe harbor for securities’ private offerings. Such instruments are only supposed to be made available to accredited investors and non-accredited investors that have enough sophistication to be able to assess this type of investment. Agents, however, have tried to circumvent securities laws by claiming that a (nonexistent) attorney gave them a letter stating that the private offering actually wasn’t a security.

Also up for sale lately are self-directed IRAs and promissory notes. Structured products have also been quite popular, although unfortunately, Borg noted, many agents and brokers don’t even understand what they are selling.

FINRA Suspends and Fines GlobaLink Securities Principal

Published on: September 19, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

FINRA is fining GlobaLink Securities Registered Principal Junhua Michael Liao $20,000. According to the SRO’s findings, through Liao, the firm executed an agreement to sell and market a Regulation D offering comprised of promissory notes for a medical receivables financing company. The financial firm then is said to have sold over $1.2 million of the notes to certain customers, resulting in about $56,700 in commissions.

FINRA also said that during the period in question, it was Liao’s job as the compliance officer for the firm to makes sure that GlobaLink Securities set up, kept up, and enforced a supervisory system and written supervisory procedures designed to ensure compliance with regulations and laws and rules that were applicable. The agency said that while the financial firm did keep up written supervisory procedures regarding private placement sales, the WSPs were not sufficient and lacked specific details about how the firm was to perform due diligence, handle transactions, ensure that a Regulation D product was appropriate for investors, and document GlobaLink’s actions and decisions pertaining to the transactions.

FINRA said that because of the deficient WSPs and inadequate supervision, the firm did not perform proper due diligence on the offerings and that this stopped GlobaLink and Liao from finding out that the issuer had previous payment problems on other note offerings, which resulted in the private placement memorandum misrepresenting the past performance of that issuer. Liao consented to the described sanctions as well as to the SRO’s entry of findings. In addition to the fine, he received a one-month suspension from associating with any other FINRA member in any type of principal role.

Investor Sues Berthel Fisher Over TNP 2008 Participating Notes Program LLC

Published on: July 29, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Investor Jon Hanson is suing Berthel Fisher & Co. Financial Services Inc. for allegedly not conducting the necessary due diligence on the TNP 2008 Participating Notes Program or making the proper disclosures to parties like him that backed the high-risk investment. The private placement went into default in 2012.

The independent brokerage firm, which not so long ago settled the majority of investor claims over real estate deals involving Diversified Business Services and Investments Inc., (a real estate manager that is now bankrupt), could be facing a class action securities case involving a failed deal with Tony Thompson, the real estate investor. This would be the first time that a broker-could be hit with a class action over a Thompson National Properties LLC-sponsored product.

According to Hanson’s securities fraud lawsuit, Berthel Fisher allegedly know there were misrepresentations and omission in the TNP 2008 Participating Notes Program memorandum yet did not probe further into the red flags. Instead, the financial firm used the “misleading TNP 2008 PPM” to help collect about $26.2M from more than 200 investors. Although the independent broker-dealer did not sell all of the TNP 2008 Notes Program and not all of the $26M was sold to its clients, it is a defendant of this private placement case because it was the underwriter of the deal.

Wells Fargo Settles Securities Lawsuit Over Medical Capital Holdings Ponzi Scam for $105M

Published on: May 11, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) has consented to pay $105M to investors of the now failed Medical Capital Holdings Inc. The bank had served as trustee for Medical Capital securities.

The medical receivables financing company got about $2.2 billion from thousands of investors between 2001 and 2009 via the private placement offerings that were promissory notes. The private placement was a high commission financial instrument that promised annual returns of 8.5% to 10.5%. Per court filings, investors paid Medical Capital nearly $325 million in administrative fees. Dozens of independent brokerage firms sold the notes.

It was in 2009 that the SEC accused affiliates of Medical Capital of committing securities fraud against investors. The financial scam was quickly shut down and the company soon entered receivership but investors got back just half their money. Many of them would go on to file a securities lawsuit against trustees Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BK) and Wells Fargo accusing the financial firms of failing to fulfill their role as trustees by neglecting to detect the fraud. Meantime, many of the brokerage firms that sold the MedCap notes are no longer in business because they sank from the securities arbitration payments and legal costs that followed as a result.

Securities Roundup: Venecredit Fined $25K for Working with Foreign Finders, Ex-Merrill Lynch/LPL Financial Rep. Faces Fraud Charges, & BrokersXpress Broker is Suspended Over Private Placement-Related Misconduct

Published on: March 5, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Venecredit Fined $25K for Working with Foreign Finders to Generate Retail Investor Business

According to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Venecredit Securities must pay a $25,000 fine for allegedly using foreign finders to get new retail investor business. The financial firm has now been censured for two years.

The SRO says that the foreign finders served as the primary contacts between Venecredit and the clients and had access to account information via the clearing firm’s platform. These finders worked for a foreign brokerage firm that shares directors and officers with Venecredit and its wholly owned entity. FINRA contends that not only did Venecredit fail to create and put into effect proper supervisory measures that would have allowed it to look at customer complaints about the employees at the foreign brokerage firm, but also it failed to keep electronic correspondence from both the foreign traders and the personal email accounts of its registered representatives.

Institutional Investor Fraud Roundup: 3,001 Whistleblower Tips Sent to SEC in ’12, CFTC Contends with ‘Regulatory Cliff,’ and Private Placement Failures Prompt Insurers to More Closely Examine Alternative Investments

Published on: November 17, 2012 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the SEC’s Whistleblower Office, during fiscal year 2012 it received 3,001 tips. The categories that received the most complaints involved the areas related to manipulation, offering fraud, and corporate disclosures and financials. Although complaints came from every state, the states with the most complaints were California, with 435 whistleblower tips, 246 from New York, while 202 tips came from Florida. Tips also were sent in from 49 countries.

During this past fiscal year, there were 143 notices of covered enforcement actions that resulted in sanctions of over $1 million—the minimum amount that needs to be collected for a whistleblower to obtain a reward. (A quality, original tip may entitle a whistleblower to 10-30% of what the government recovers). The SEC said that its Investor Protection Fund, which pays these rewards to qualifying whistleblowers, is fully funded and at the end of FY 2012 contained over $435 million. In August, the SEC paid its first whistleblower reward of $50,000 under the program.

In other securities regulator news, Scott O’Malia the CFTC commissioner announced that the agency will have to contend with a “regulatory cliff” next month when the temporary no-action relief stemming from new swaps rules expires. The regulator had put out 18 no-action letters and other guidance on October 12, providing a lot of swap market participants with a brief reprieve from rules that were scheduled to go into effect the next day. The relief for most expires on the last day of the year, and O’Malia wants the agency to take action to resolve this situation. He made his comments at the DC conference sponsored by George Mason University’s Mercatus Center.

Texas Broker-Dealer Pinnacle Partners Financial is Expelled by FINRA Hearing Officer Over Allegedly Fraudulent Sales of Unregistered Securities and Private Placements of Oil and Gas

Published on: April 25, 2012 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In a default decision, San Antonio broker-dealer Pinnacle Partners Financial, Corp. has been expelled by a FINRA hearing officer for Texas securities fraud. The company’s president Brian Alfaro has also been barred. The financial firm and its head are accused of running a boiler room, engaging in the fraudulent selling of unregistered securities and private placements for gas and oil, and making numerous misrepresentations related to these investments. Alfaro is also accused of taking some of the investors’ money to pay for personal spending and unrelated business costs. The default decision was issued after Alfaro failed to show up at the FINRA panel hearing.

It was a year ago that FINRA issued an indefinite suspension against Alfaro and Pinnacle for not complying with a temporary order to cease and desist from making fraudulent misrepresentations. The two parties, however, allegedly kept making them, in addition to omissions related to the sale and offering of specific oil and gas joint interests.

According to the hearing officer, the Texas securities firm and its president operated the boiler room between August 2008 and March 2011. 10 brokers made cold calls numbering in the thousands to draw in investors for drilling investments involving gas and oil that was controlled or owned by Alfaro. They were able to get over 100 investors to put in more than $10 million.

Allegedly, between January 2009 and March 2011, Alfaro misused some of these monies, which investors thought were going toward well production and drilling, to cover some of his personal spending and other businesses. The misrepresentations and omissions that they are accused of purposely making in numerous private placements about a number of matters, include those involving inflated natural gas prices, cash flow, gross returns, and projected returns for natural gas. For example, they allegedly gave out a document claiming that over $14 million had been distributed to investors when, in fact, that figure was closer to under $1.5 million. Alfaro and Pinnacle also supposedly got rid of unfavorable, key information from well operator reports and gave investors maps that didn’t show undesirable wells that were located close to sites where drilling was supposed to take place.

To make restitution, Pinnacle and Alfaro will have to rescind the contracts of those that invested in the fraudulent offerings. They also must pay back the sales commission to clients who don’t ask for rescission.

FINRA Hearing Officer Expels Pinnacle Partners Financial Corp. and Bars President for Fraud, MarketWatch, April 25, 2012
Texas broker-dealer expelled by FINRA hearing officer, Reuters, April 25, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Texas Securities Fraud: US Supreme Court Turns Down Ex-Enron Corp Chief Executive Jeffrey Skilling’s Appeal to Have His Criminal Conviction Overturned, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 18, 2012
Texas Securities Fraud: State Law Class Action in R. Allen Stanford’s Ponzi Scam Not Barred by SLUSA, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 20, 2012
Three Oil Service Executives Face SEC Charges in Texas Court For Allegedly Bribing Nigerian Customs Officials, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, March 22, 2012 Continue Reading ›

Sale of Interest in Private Placement Offerings by Medical Capital Holdings, Provident Royalties DBSI Leads to FINRA Order that Investors Get $3.2M in Restitution

Published on: November 29, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority has ordered another 10 individuals and 8 financial firms to pay $3.2M in restitution to clients who were sold interest in risky private placements that were issued by DBSI, Inc., Medical Capital Holdings, Inc., and Provident Royalties, LLC. The parties that were sanctioned allegedly sold the interests without having reasonable grounds to recommend the securities to customers. The SRO believes there were inadequate supervisory systems in place.

FINRA fined the following parties for allegedly failing to reasonably investigate the private placement offerings to ensure that the firms making the sales were fulfilling their obligation to customers.

• NEXT Financial Group, Inc.: $2 million in restitution and a $50,000 fine. VP Steven Lynn Nelson was fined $10,000 related Provident Royalties private placements sales.

• Investors Capital Corporation: About $400,000 in restitution over Provident Royalties private placement sales and a CIP Leveraged Fund Advisors-offering.

• Garden State Securities, Inc.: $300,000 related to a Medical Capital private placement. Kevin John DeRosa was fined $25,000. Vincent Michael Bruno, who is chief compliance officer, will pay a $10,000 fine.

• Capital Financial Services: Clients will get $200,000. Ex-principal Brian W. Boppre is fined $10,000. Private placements from both Medical Capital and Provident Royalties were involved.

• National Securities Corporation: $175,000 in restitution related to the sale of Provident Royalties and Medical Capital private placements. Director Matthew G. Portes was suspended and fined $10,000.

• Equity Services, Inc.: Nearly $164,000 in restitution and a $50,000 fine. Sr. VP Stephen Anthony Englese was fined $10,000 while representative Anthony Paul Campagna must pay $25,000.

• Securities America, Inc.: Fined $250,000.

• Newbridge Securities Corporation: A $25,000 fine related to private placements sold by DBSI and Medical Capital. Ex-Chief Compliance Officer Robin Fran Bush was fined $15,000.

• Former Meadowbrook Securities CEO and President of LLC Leroy H. Paris II must pay a $10,000 fine related to the sale of Medical Capital and Provident Royalties private placements.

• Michael D. Shaw was barred from the securities industry. He was previously associated with VSR Financial Services, Inc.

Between ’01-’09, Medical Capital Holdings was able to raise about $2.2 billion through the private placement offerings of promissory notes. Over 20,000 investors participated. Meantime, from September ’06 to January ’09, Provident Asset Management, LLC sold and marketed limited partnerships and stock in 23 private placements issued by Provident Royalties. More than $485 million was raised from over 7,700 investors who made their purchases through over 50 retail broker-dealers. Last year, however, a number of the private placement deals soured, causing a number of broker-dealers that sold them to shut down, while the investors sustained financial losses.

FINRA Sanctions Eight Firms and 10 Individuals for Selling Interests in Troubled Private Placements, Including Medical Capital, Provident Royalties and DBSI, Without Conducting a Reasonable Investigation, FINRA, November 29, 2011

FINRA fines eight firms for private placement sale, Reuters, November 29, 2011

More Blog Posts:
FINRA Wants Brokers Selling Regulation D Private Placements to Take Part in Tougher Due Diligence Process, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, June 7, 2011

Boogie Investment Group Inc. Fails Because of Fraudulent Private Placements by Provident Royalties LLC and Medical Capital Holdings Inc., Stockbroker Fraud Blog, October 27, 2011

Boogie Investment Group Inc. Fails Because of Fraudulent Private Placements by Provident Royalties LLC and Medical Capital Holdings Inc.

Published on: October 27, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Boogie Investment Group Inc. has submitted its withdrawal request to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. The small broker-dealer is the 20th financial firm that sold Provident Royalties private placements to either leave the brokerage business or announce its intentions to depart. According to Investment News, that’s nearly 40% of independent broker-dealers. Just this year alone, 11 broker-dealers that sold the private placements closed shop. Provident’s bankruptcy receiver reports on its Web site that 52 broker-dealers sold the shares.

Boogie sold about $410K in private placements. Its revenue at the end of the fiscal year was $422K-a definite reduction from the $1.2M of three years back. One of the reasons Boogie decided to bow out of the industry is because of the litigation expenses stemming from the failed private placements. Not only is Boogie contending with a class action lawsuit, but also, it is faced with a securities case filed by investors that purchased Provident’s Shale Royalties products and other arbitration cases not related to Provident private placements.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority has been tough on the financial firms and individuals that sold interests in private placements while allegedly failing to thoroughly investigate these products or even have reasonable grounds to believe that placements were suitable for clients. The failure to do the appropriate due diligence resulted in the firms being unable to know what were the risks involved. FINRA also says that the principals it has sanctioned lacked a reasonable basis for allowing their financial firms’ registered representatives to keep selling the offerings.

Ban on Private Securities Offerings Solicitations Could Be Revised by SEC or Congress, Says Ex-Official

Published on: July 11, 2011 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to ex- SEC’s Office of International Corporate Finance chief Sarah Hanks, there is the strong possibility that Congress or the Securities and Exchange Commission will modify the agency’s ban on the general solicitation for private securities offerings and the number of shareholders that trigger reporting requirements. Hanks says that comments made by lawmakers and SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro indicate congressional intent to loosen the requirements, as well as “regulatory momentum.” Such changes could happen in the next couple of years.

Restricted securities are securities that did not go through the SEC’s registration and public processes. Requirements don’t allow issuers of nonpublic offerings relying on Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act or its safe harbor—Rule 506 of Regulation to use advertising or general solicitation to draw investors to their placements. The 1934 Securities Exchange Act’s Section 12(g) mandates that an issuer register securities “held of record” by at least 500 individuals and if the issuer’s total assets are over $10 million.

It was just recently that it became known that the SEC was investigating Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s (GS)’s reselling of Facebook-issued securities to investors. Earlier this year, the investment bank made the decision to limit the offering to offshore investors over concerns that the degree of media attention might result in a violation of US securities laws. According to The Wall Street Journal, although Facebook executives had to restructure the deal, the private offering of up to $1.5 billion in Facebook shares stayed on track. As of January, more than $7 billion in orders came through from foreign investors.