An irreverent Wall Street Blog
by Bill Singer
Join BrokeAndBroker blog on Facebook  Follow the BrokeAndBroker blog on Twitter  Connect with BrokeAndBroker on LinkedIn  Join Bill Singer on Google+  Subscribe to RSS Feed

TIC-ed Off Customers Sue Over Tenants In Common Investment
Written: October 6, 2011

In a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) Arbitration Statement of Claim filed in November 2010, Claimant asserted quite the laundry list of causes of action in connection with an investment in Canyon Creek Financial, LLC/Cottonwood Senior Living Property, LP.(a private placement):

  • excessive and unsuitable investment in a private placement;
  • false and misleading statements;
  • negligent misrepresentation;
  • breach of fiduciary duty;
  • breach of the covenants of good faith and fair dealing;
  • negligent supervision;
  • breach of conduct;
  • violations of section 20 of the 1934 Act; and
  • respondeat superior.

Claimant sought at least $400,000 in compensatory damages, fees, and costs. At the close of the hearing, Claimant asked for $373,500 in restitution.  In the Matter of the FINRA Arbitration Between The William Dale Kelly and Joan Hull Trust, Claimant, v.  Investment Security Corporation and Lawrence Benjamin Miller, Respondents (FINRA Arbitration 10-05028, September 30, 2011).

Respondent Investment Security Corporation generally denied the allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses.


The FINRA Arbitration Panel dismissed all of Claimaints claims. 

SIDE BAR: Okay, that’s fine — as far as that goes, but as with many FINRA Arbitrations, just what the hell was this case about?   The Panel dismissed Claimant’s claims about what? Apart from the kitchen sink of allegations, we’re pretty much in the dark about the precise nature of the dispute. 

Spoiler Alert

As will readily become apparent, this case appears to be yet another dispute about what has become known as a Tenants In Common (“TIC”) real estate investment. 

SIDE BAR: TIC investments became increasingly popular as a way for a seller of real estate to qualify for a so-called 1031 Tax Free Exchange via the acquisition of an ownership interest in another property.  Sales of fractional ownership interests to sellers of appreciated realty became an attractive business for many FINRA brokerage firms, who marketed this transaction as a way to preserve the tax-free status of a property exchange.

However, as with most flavor-of-the-month investment ideas, TIC transactions have seen their share of consumer complaints.  Among the most common source of friction is the alleged lack of adequate pre-sale due diligence by the brokerage firm, and the failure of the firm to reasonably monitor ongoing developments at the subject properties.  A cursory glance at the litigation in this area shows disagreements between claimant investors and respondent brokerage firms as to the quality of the latter’s review of financial statements; the thoroughness of background checks involving promoters; and the validity of any appraisals done on the property in dispute. 

The Past That’s Now The Prelude: Read this helpful 2005 commentary by the NASD (now FINRA): Private Placements of Tenants-in-Common Interests: NASD Issues Guidance on Section 1031 Tax-Deferred Exchanges of Real Property for Certain Tenants-in-Common Interests in Real Property Offerings (Notice to Members 05-18, March 2005)


A good mystery should never telegraph until the end who the killer is.  However, FINRA Arbitration Decisions ought not aspire to compete with Whodunits – the undertaking here is not mass-market fiction but a thoughtful explanation about the factual nature of a dispute and the rationale for the ensuing ruling. 

In this FINRA Arbitration, we’re hit with a surprise ending when we learn — albeit by implication and inference — that the dispute involved a TIC.  Notwithstanding, this Arbitration Panel does redeem itself, albeit belatedly, in a thoughtful explanation of the rationale for its ruling:

1. Although the suitability of investing in tenant in common (“TIC”) interests by seniors can be questioned, and the customer care by the stockbroker and his principal could have been better, the Panel found that in this case the TIC investment in question was an acceptable alternative given that:

a. The Claimant had already invested a much larger amount in two real estate TICs with another broker and from the very beginning of their relationship with Respondents expressed a strong desire to make a third TIC investment;

b. The expected short to medium term duration of the investment was suitable; and,

c. The generous level of income expected to be received was also suitable.

The Panel’s Deliberation Algorithm

When focusing on the “suitability” of a given investment, FINRA arbitrators often start with macro considerations and then examine the more micro facts in a particular case.  Here we see that the panel was indeed troubled about the larger issue of the appropriateness of senior citizens investing in TICs. Also, in this particular arbitration, the arbitrators questioned the level and degree of “customer care” that was extended to the Claimant – and the Panel’s disapproval was clearly conveyed through the characterization that the care “could have been better.” 

So, even before coming to the plate, Respondents seem to have been penalized with two strikes.  Nonetheless, the Panel still went beyond those typically preliminary factors and looked into the more dispositive guts of this case. To this Panel’s credit, it offered a fairly substantive rationale for why it overcame its initial bias about the TIC transaction for the older Claimants and deemed the investment suitable. 

For starters, the arbitrators examined the threshold issue of whether this TIC was a virgin investment in a new product by unsophisticated investors.  The Panel noted that the customers had previously invested in two real estate TICs with another broker, and that the invested sums exceeded the dollars at risk in the investment disputed in this case.  Moreover, in addition to a prior history with the same investment product, the customers did not come off as disinterested investors who were overly amenable to their broker’s recommendation.  To the contrary, the Decision characterized the customers as having “expressed a strong desire to make a third TIC investment.”  Further, arbitrators deemed the expected short to medium term duration of the TIC in dispute as suitable. 

Finally, the Panel asked one more critical question: Was the anticipated reward worthwhile in terms of the likely risks?  In deeming the expected income as “generous,”  it appears that the arbitrators ultimately weighted the scales in favor of the overall suitability of the TIC.

Industry participants should note the algorithmic nature of the FINRA Arbitration Panel’s inquiry into the suitability of this investment and guide their customer dealings accordingly.  A practice pointer would be to ensure the memorialization of all discussions and considerations about the factors cited in the Decision.  Having such records could tip in your favor any doubts about what you told your customers and what they understood.

For public customers, an investment that’s suitable for you shouldn’t mean one that is generically suitable for investors in general. Suitability should be achieved based upon your unique circumstances of age, sophistication, net worth, income, etc.  Demand a recommendation that’s “best” for you.  A lazy stockbroker might put a smorgasbord of suitable investments before you and try to push you into purchasing the one that pays the highest commissions or fees, or is a house-product that the employing firm prefers to move.  Be careful. Ask questions.  Insist upon what’s best for you and you alone.


Previous Entries
May 29, 2015
If there is a shortcut through the forest of continuing education, a detour around career qualification exams, or any way in which to avoid and evade ... Read On
May 28, 2015
Ever the wordsmith and societal critic, author Charles Dickens is credited with saying that "charity begins at home and justice begins next door." Fra... Read On
May 27, 2015
If Hillary Clinton could use a personal server for her emails, why can't a registered representative use an AOL email account? Then there's the whole ... Read On
May 26, 2015
Stockbroker, Compliance, Legal, and Regulatory JobsEmployment Page Jobs#wallstreetjobs @brokeandbrokerNOTICE TO EMPLOYERS: Brok... Read On
May 23, 2015
SEC Commissioner Stein Stands Alone In Her Defense Of The Investing Public And IndustryOne, and only one, Securities and Exchange Commissioner got it ... Read On
May 22, 2015
One, and only one, Securities and Exchange Commissioner got it right. To her ever-lasting credit and to the shame of her colleagues, Commissioner Kara... Read On Job Search

Related Topics
Tag Cloud
Internet FINRA Bear Stearns Bloomberg SEC NASD NYSE Money Laundering Due Diligence Waiver Forbes China Broy Woody Allen Madoff NAC NPR Marketplace Stanford UBS Ketchum Antitrust NASDAQ RRBDLAW Schapiro Bill Singer BrokerAndBroker USERRA Morgan Keegan Arbitration Counterclaim Khuzami BrokeAndBroker Aleynikov Goldman Sachs brokeandbroker Promissory Note U4 Bill SInger EFL CFTC Huffington Post Flash Crash arbitration RBC Ponzi Affinity Fraud Wachovia Criminal Raymond James Expungement Fraud Securities Fraud Outside Business Activity Registered Rep Magazine FOREX FBI Banc of America Pro Se PCAOB Supreme Court Morgan Stanley Smith Barney E*Trade Margin email Galleon Penson U5 Defamation Protocol Wells Fargo Punitive Damages Citigroup Merrill Lynch ARS Employee Forgivable Loan Street Legal Morgan Stanley AWC Fidelity Bankruptcy Broke And Broker HFT David Sobel Day Trading Ameriprise Commissions Spouse Schwab Commission CRD Kenneth Starr IRS CNBC Complaint ATM Skimming Hacking Phishing Malware Naskovets Poteroba Koval Lincoln Financial Selling Away Outside Business Activities Rakoff 2nd Circuit Second Circuit IRA 401k Forgery Tax Email Netschi Moore Whistleblower Street Sweeper Countrywide Tran Bharara Facebook Online Severance Bonus Eligibility Rule TD Ameritrade Hedge Fund SAC 1099 Smith Barney Lehman Brothers SIPC IC3 Scottrade Lehman JPMorgan Chase Hertz Insider Trading Bank of America Department of Justice Elles Bribe Auction Rate Securities Raiding Spam Edward Jones Medicare Diabetes Dow Schumer Thain Walter Bid Rigging Real Estate Discrimination Wall Street Statutory Disqualification Form U4 Form U5 Indictment Boyland DOJ Corruption bill singer FTC Do Not Call FINRA Arbitration Costa Rica Settlement LIBOR Varney Plea Rule 8210 Eligibility RRBDlaw 8210 Appeal Fowler LPL Johnson Cellphone US Airways JPM BrokeandBroker Reg D MSSB Vault Loan SunTrust Discovery Employment Rosenthal Recruiting Lawyer Trading Platform JP Morgan Employment Tuesday Wrongful Termination Bank Guarantee WaMu Solicitation REIT Martin Credit Cards Rule 3050 Away Account Credit Repair PN Advisor Placement Group Fifth Amendment Forex Mortgage Private Placement Moon CGMI Failure to Supervise Merrill Anderson Exam Lee Borrowing Tax Lien Charity Conversion Oppenheimer Wedbush Felony Misdemeanor Expenses ING Lien OTR Estate Jobs Florida Credit Card Elderly Flash Drive Annuity Expense Reimbursement FNMA BrokeAndBroke TIC DWI Promissory Notes Suitability Will POA Power of Attorney Casino NSF MF Global Counterfeit Preet Bharara Corzine Hacker Deferred Compensation RIA Prison Disclosure NASAA Aguilar FCPA Subway Testimony Identity Theft Gold Dell Bar Injunction Bank Deutsche Bank Hospital Due Process God HSBC Private Placements Eric Stein Wire Fraud FINOP CCO Compliance Audit Joshua Brown Backstage Wall Street Obstruction of Justice Reuters Retaliation Variable Annuity Arbitraiton Outside Account Options Telephone Wine Series 7 Social Media ADA Pacifico Non-Prosecution Agreement Confirm Tax Fraud Retirement OBA Equity Indexed Annuities EIA Disability MetLife Continuing Education Cheating OIP Tax Liens Willful CE Unregistered Impersonation Annuities BBVA Business Expenses ETF JOBS Act Mail Fraud Parking Variable Annuities Signatures BitTorrent Impersonator Wire Transfer Wire Crowdfunding Nasdaq Away Accounts WSP Laptop Dodd Frank Checks RMBS AML PST Solicited Unsolicited Congress SRO Password Wife Discretion Non-Solicitation Restaurant Commodities Private Securities Transaction Offer of Settlement Money Market employment jobs Great Recession Chase Investment Services Arrest Barclays Liens Failure To Supervise Apple Time And Price T&P Willfully Husband Letter of Authorization LOA Sexism Debit Card Knight Test Practice Sale Unfair Competition Signature Judgments Undisclosed Settlement Trainee Fee Trust Laser Side Bar Mattera Female Sales Assistant Kennedy Charge Sexist NML Argentina Embezzlement Silver Investor Alert Evidence Judgment Bank Fraud Deceased Bill Singer BrokeAndBroker TSSB OHO Leveraged ETF Mary Jo White Trustee Motion To Dismiss Frumento Conspiracy 6th Circuit Proctor Commissioner Stein Rule 3040 Customer Files Class Action Beneficiary NYAG Schneiderman 11th Circuit Insurance Gallagher White Self Regulation Short Sale Compromise Website Rule 2010 Check TRO Supervision Vacatur Remand SDNY Rule 12206 BrokeAndBroker Bill Singer Piwowar Stifel Rule 1122 Article V signature Confidential Inside Information Reg SP VA Regulation SP Fees Cease And Desist Customer Examination Rule 3270 Rule 3240 Annual Compliance Questionnaire OWB 2Cir Red Flags Payroll Stockbrokers ALJ Cybercrime Loans BrokerCheck Altered Records
Email Bill Singer Connect with Bill Singer on Facebook Follow Bill Singer on Twitter Link up with Bill Singer on LinkedIn Join Bill Singer on Google+