Articles Tagged with Ausdal Financial Partners

Chicago-based Stoltmann Law Offices represents investors who’ve suffered losses from alternative investments. Some brokers like to pitch investors on the idea of making a lot of money by investing in alternative investments, mostly because brokers get paid handsome commissions for selling them.  GPB Capital and more recently, GWG Holdings are examples of alternative investments that were pushed hard by brokerage firms, with terrible results. There is a sub-category of these investments called “liquid alternative”, which are complex and costly for clients.

FINRA, the U.S. securities industry regulator, recently issued a warning about liquid “alts,” which invest in assets “other than stocks and bonds — such as real estate, commodities and derivatives — to give retail investors exposure to alternative investments in a vehicle that can be traded daily. They are touted as a way to beat market returns but also can be risky and expensive.”

“While these funds may be appropriate for some investors,” the regulator’s warning stated, “FINRA has consistently emphasized the importance of member firms’ sales practice obligations for these and other products, especially when such products may carry additional risks for customers.” These products are inappropriate for investors unless their objective is speculation – plain and simple.

The securities attorneys at Chicago-based Stoltmann Law Offices are representing investors in FINRA arbitration actions against multiple brokerage firms that recommended GWG-L-bonds to their clients. Our investigation into GWG, which includes monitoring and being involved in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy, is focused on two issues: First, GWG L-Bonds were speculative, high risk, unrated debt instruments. One of the biggest issues with this bond program is, the bondholders were subordinate to hundreds of millions of dollars other debt.  The debt owed by GWG in these bonds are not the first priority to be paid back by the company on the “capital stack”.  These were very high risk investments, so unless that was made clear to you by your financial advisor, you may have a claim to pursue for misrepresentations and commissions and for recommending an unsuitable investment.  Either of these are actionable.

The other main issue here from the brokerage firm perspective is the failure to perform reasonable due diligence. Although 160 brokerage firms sold GWG Financial, this is actually a super-minority, roughly 5%, of all brokerage firms nationwide. In reality, very few firms approved GWG for sale to their customers.  GWG was allowed to borrow up to 90% of its listed assets. Its assets are almost all illiquid and subject to “fair valuation” which is an extremely dangerous financial situation for investors.  Big firms like Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley don’t go anywhere near unrated speculative bonds like this. But a lot of firms do because GWG paid brokers massive 8% commissions to sell these bonds which were the financial life-blood of GWG.  Even through the US government began investigating GWG in October 2020, and brokerage firms still continued to sell them.  As early as march 2020, GWG was reporting publicly about “several material weaknesses” with respect to the company’s accounting processes.  By 2020, there were more Red Flags about GWG than a Soviet May-Day parade and yet brokerage firms continues to sell it, and one reportedly BOOSTED sales.

It was reported this week that Centaurus Financial, with 640 brokers nationwide, actually increased the amount individual investors could invest in GWG from $100,000, to $150,000. Brokers went on the sales push to recommend their clients increase their investment in the GWG L-Bonds in April 2020, after GWG reported material issues with accounting and after it entered into a highly questionable transaction with the Beneficient Company, alleged now to have been securities fraud.

Stoltmann Law Offices, a Chicago-based investor rights and securities law firm, has been representing investors in cases against brokerage firms that sold the private placement limited partnership offerings in several GPB Funds, including:

  • GPB Automotive Fund
  • GPB Holdings Fund II

A former client of Joan Norton, a financial advisor of Ausdal Financial Partners, won a $1.2 million arbitration award against her. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) awarded the money to her after siding with her, claiming Norton breached fiduciary duty and made unsuitable investment recommendations. Norton advised Cindy-Marie Rogers to roll over a lump-sum pension payout, plus put money into an IRA and buy a variable annuity. Rogers took an early retirement because she was advised by Norton she could do so. After this, she got hit with a steep tax bill. Joan Norton and her firm, Ausdal Partners were ordered to pay $1.24 million in damages plus interest, and additional costs of $10,000. Please call our law firm if you would like to sue Joan Norton or her former firm, Ausdal Partners. 312-332-4200.

CNBC
FOX Business
The Wall Street Journal
Bloomberg
CBS
FOX News Channel
USA Today
abc NEWS
DATELINE
npr
Contact Information