Pace Securities | Page 18 | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Pace Securities
July 5, 2020
9:20 pm
Investor1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 28
Member Since:
June 22, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Shelley Mackie said
I was told by PCU that this situation was going on since mid last year before the pandemic. Because PSC could not come up with the funding.

I read all these posts and I feel empathy for us all. It sickens me at times.

I believe PCU will make this right.

I was told in December that my advisor didn't know this would happen but it's just a number thing. I was also told other things that after 5 years I get my money back. I didn't get my signed copy either as what I thought I was signing was going to be mailed to me or something. I transferred more money in early 2019 and then all of a sudden they moved more money to the FHH shares. I sent a email to question this and no answer no reply.

But if anyone wants more information PM  

I hope you're right and PCU decides to “make this right”.

July 5, 2020
9:23 pm
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6679
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
342sp_Permalink sp_Print

Investor1 said
PCU Owns or owned PSC.

Owning an investment dealer doesn't make one an investment dealer.

Just like owning a dog doesn't make one a dog!

July 5, 2020
9:41 pm
member
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 38
Member Since:
July 5, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
343sp_Permalink sp_Print

Norman1 said

Investor1 said
PCU Owns or owned PSC.

Owning an investment dealer doesn't make one an investment dealer.

Just like owning a dog doesn't make one a dog!  

No, but owning a dog makes you responsible for it.

Is this the PACE legal team on here trying to intimidate people?

July 6, 2020
5:16 am
Elaine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
May 19, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
344sp_Permalink sp_Print

Norman1 said

Investor1 said
PCU Owns or owned PSC.

Owning an investment dealer doesn't make one an investment dealer.

Just like owning a dog doesn't make one a dog!  

If you owned a dog you would not be letting it run wild in your credit union biting old ladies in the butt ,and then hiding the evidence(Lack of paperwork seems to be a thing here)And this dog is actually a dog owned by the credit union.
How the heck did Pace Credit Union ever think having their own tellers sell these Securities to unsuspecting customers and earning a nice 3 Grand commission(my case anyways) would be a good idea.Pace Credit Union provided the premises where this occurred.Not sure what to call it.

July 6, 2020
5:30 am
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2748
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
345sp_Permalink sp_Print

Elaine said

If you owned a dog you would not be letting it run wild in your credit union biting old ladies in the butt ,and then hiding the evidence(Lack of paperwork seems to be a thing here)And this dog is actually a dog owned by the credit union.
How the heck did Pace Credit Union ever think having their own tellers sell these Securities to unsuspecting customers and earning a nice 3 Grand commission(my case anyways) would be a good idea.Pace Credit Union provided the premises where this occurred.Not sure what to call it.  

Elaine thought/believed she bought a GIC which is very different from a pref. If she knew she bought a pref but the advisor told her the principal is safe, that is a little different cuz safe does not equal to guarantee by any means. In her case, it seems like the advisor did her wrong to some extent.

However I do not think that every one who bought the prefs are under the same circumstances. There will be some who are aware of risk (regardless of the level of risk), but choose the product for the enhanced yield. In that case, it’s only sensible for the investor to bear some pain if one is genuinely fair. This is in general what the judge ruling will base on as well.

Knowingly purchased a sophisticated product and cry foul and play dumb when things go bad does not satisfy the court. Which is why the accredited investor designation is very important. And if one just sign without thinking what it means, you may be out of luck.

Certainly not defending those advisors who knowingly deceit the investors in this case, but simply asking for PSU to cover 100% loss for everybody does not seem like a sensible standpoint from the other side of the table (PSU members included, not just management)

July 6, 2020
5:32 am
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3890
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The argument boils down to who's responsible. Clearly many adults are inclined to blame others 100% for their predicament, that's human nature, and so they are seeking 100% restitution. Personally I don't understand why my entering into a contract and freely signing a document, or my not obtaining documentation, etc, is 100% someone else's fault, zero % my fault, but I'm not the boss of the world (my granddaughter is) so maybe there will be 100% restitution, who knows?

If this investment had turned out as people thought it would, they would have been quite happy to have earned their 5% or whatever it was and to have achieved returns a fair bit higher than if they'd bought GICs, no further questions asked.

I'm not sure I can agree with the notion of differentiating between different degrees of risk awareness by various investors, I tend to think everybody should get the same resolution, somewhere between 0 - 100% for all.

July 6, 2020
5:43 am
Elaine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
May 19, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

savemoresaveoften said

Elaine thought/believed she bought a GIC which is very different from a pref. If she knew she bought a pref but the advisor told her the principal is safe, that is a little different cuz safe does not equal to guarantee by any means. In her case, it seems like the advisor did her wrong to some extent.

However I do not think that every one who bought the prefs are under the same circumstances. There will be some who are aware of risk (regardless of the level of risk), but choose the product for the enhanced yield. In that case, it’s only sensible for the investor to bear some pain if one is genuinely fair. This is in general what the judge ruling will base on as well.

Knowingly purchased a sophisticated product and cry foul and play dumb when things go bad does not satisfy the court. Which is why the accredited investor designation is very important. And if one just sign without thinking what it means, you may be out of luck.

Certainly not defending those advisors who knowingly deceit the investors in this case, but simply asking for PSU to cover 100% loss for everybody does not seem like a sensible standpoint from the other side of the table (PSU members included, not just management)  

So what does accredited investor mean-my advisor probably should have been sent back to school
Because he was like woww you OWN A HOUSE-must be worth a million bucks-maybe two( I clarified to him it was a knockdown war house and was worth land value only-maybe 600 grand at the time).I had no idea that your house does not count so when he said YOU QUALIFY FOR THIS-I had no idea.HE was the advisor.I was the shmuck.At my own credit union being conned by a credit union employee As you all seem to know houses don't count for the Warren Buffet type investors.All I can think he did not know(the form does not specify what is to considered for the having a million bucks to throw a way category)or he did it intentional.Either way-as a credit union employee he was responsible for knowing his job and the longer this goes on the more stress I am under.

July 6, 2020
8:31 am
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2748
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
348sp_Permalink sp_Print

There is actually an official (not arbitrary) definition for someone to be qualified as a accredited investor. However the onus is on the investor especially if they declare/agree and sign the dotted line.

https://accreditedcapitalcorp.com/cadosc45.php

The top section shows the criteria. All hedge funds, sophisticated products, etc will need the investor to attest and sign.

July 6, 2020
9:16 am
sevenup
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 42
Member Since:
May 19, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
349sp_Permalink sp_Print

Elaine said

If you owned a dog you would not be letting it run wild in your credit union biting old ladies in the butt ,and then hiding the evidence(Lack of paperwork seems to be a thing here)And this dog is actually a dog owned by the credit union.
How the heck did Pace Credit Union ever think having their own tellers sell these Securities to unsuspecting customers and earning a nice 3 Grand commission(my case anyways) would be a good idea.Pace Credit Union provided the premises where this occurred.Not sure what to call it.  

Elaine, you get my vote for "best reply of the day"! 🙂

July 6, 2020
9:38 am
Douglas Thomson
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 15
Member Since:
June 8, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
350sp_Permalink sp_Print

Elaine said

So what does accredited investor mean-my advisor probably should have been sent back to school
Because he was like woww you OWN A HOUSE-must be worth a million bucks-maybe two( I clarified to him it was a knockdown war house and was worth land value only-maybe 600 grand at the time).I had no idea that your house does not count so when he said YOU QUALIFY FOR THIS-I had no idea.HE was the advisor.I was the shmuck.At my own credit union being conned by a credit union employee As you all seem to know houses don't count for the Warren Buffet type investors.All I can think he did not know(the form does not specify what is to considered for the having a million bucks to throw a way category)or he did it intentional.Either way-as a credit union employee he was responsible for knowing his job and the longer this goes on the more stress I am under.  

There is indeed a specific criteria for defining an “accredited investor”, there is also a professional standard and guidelines for “advisors” to validate that their client actually meets that standard... that’s because failure to do so (on the part of the advisor and dealer) exposes the advisor and dealer to potential civil liability for client losses...

July 6, 2020
9:42 am
i_got_smucked_too
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 33
Member Since:
July 2, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
351sp_Permalink sp_Print

I'm curious if the more knowledgeable folks here have run across this article at the OSC, and have an informed opinion:

https://www.osc.gov.on.ca/documents/en/Securities-Category3/rule_20110513_33-735_non-accredited-investors.pdf

I'm not qualified to understand whether the preference shares of PFL and FHH fall under it's umbrella. BUT I think they do. For certain, I don't qualify as an Accredited Investor, but my IA must have falsely indicated as such. Can't say where this will go, but I will be discussing this article with my lawyer.

July 6, 2020
10:01 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6679
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
352sp_Permalink sp_Print

i_got_smucked_too said
I'm curious if the more knowledgeable folks here have run across this article at the OSC, and have an informed opinion:

https://www.osc.gov.on.ca/documents/en/Securities-Category3/rule_20110513_33-735_non-accredited-investors.pdf

I'm not qualified to understand whether the preference shares of PFL and FHH fall under it's umbrella. BUT I think they do. For certain, I don't qualify as an Accredited Investor, but my IA must have falsely indicated as such. Can't say where this will go, but I will be discussing this article with my lawyer.

Yes, those PACE Financial and First Hamilton Holding private preference shares are exempt securities. They were sold without a prospectus under one of the prospectus exemptions.

The issuers in this case are PACE Financial and First Hamilton Holdings.

Not sure what "dealer" refers to in that that OSC staff notice. Is it anyone who offered the exempt securities or just "investment dealers"? PACE Securities is an investment dealer and its employees are registrants. But, PACE Credit Union is not a registered investment dealer and its employees are not registrants.

July 6, 2020
10:18 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6679
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
353sp_Permalink sp_Print

member said

No, but owning a dog makes you responsible for it.

Not if there were an Ontario Canines Act that gave dog owners general immunity from the liabilities of the dog's actions, like the Ontario Business Corporations Act does for a corporation like PACE Securities Corp.

Is this the PACE legal team on here trying to intimidate people?

Are you one of the smart people who actually saw a lawyer to learn what your actual rights are and are not?

July 6, 2020
10:28 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6679
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
354sp_Permalink sp_Print

Elaine said

If you owned a dog you would not be letting it run wild in your credit union biting old ladies in the butt ,and then hiding the evidence(Lack of paperwork seems to be a thing here)And this dog is actually a dog owned by the credit union.

I wouldn't. But, then I wouldn't be receiving $3,000 to $9,000 for each butt the dog bit and I wouldn't have corporate immunity from the consequences of the dog's bites!

How the heck did Pace Credit Union ever think having their own tellers sell these Securities to unsuspecting customers and earning a nice 3 Grand commission(my case anyways) would be a good idea.Pace Credit Union provided the premises where this occurred.Not sure what to call it.

I think the November 2019 Globe & Mail article Web of deals: PACE credit union executives committed civil fraud with years of ‘secret’ payments, regulator alleges sheds some light onto that question. It gives one an idea of the kind of people who used to run the credit union.

July 6, 2020
12:12 pm
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6679
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
355sp_Permalink sp_Print

i_got_smucked_too said
I'm curious if the more knowledgeable folks here have run across this article at the OSC, and have an informed opinion:

https://www.osc.gov.on.ca/documents/en/Securities-Category3/rule_20110513_33-735_non-accredited-investors.pdf

 

Norman1 said

Not sure what "dealer" refers to in that that OSC staff notice. Is it anyone who offered the exempt securities or just "investment dealers"? PACE Securities is an investment dealer and its employees are registrants. But, PACE Credit Union is not a registered investment dealer and its employees are not registrants.

I saw some odd wording in the First Hamilton Holdings offering memorandum about "finders" that seem to be in contrast to "dealers":

2.11.2. Dealers and Finders

The Issuer anticipates entering into various agreements from time to time with qualified agents, such as investment dealers (including the PACE Securities Corp.) and exempt market dealers, to assist with the Offering of Units and, in such circumstances, to pay commissions of up to 10% of the gross proceeds realized on the issuance of Units plus Brokers’ Warrants equal to 10% of the number of Units issued.

The Issuer anticipates paying various persons for acting as “finders”, as permitted by and pursuant to applicable securities legislation, and, in respect thereof, to pay finders’ fees of up to 10% of the subscription amounts for referring subscribers of Units to the Issuer.

Could PACE Credit Union and its employees be "finders" and not a "dealer" for regulatory purposes? So, they were not paid commissions but finders' fees!

Perhaps your lawyer would be able to see if that is significant.

It is quite possible that a "finder" would have much lower legal responsibility than a "dealer".

July 6, 2020
1:19 pm
Elaine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
May 19, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
356sp_Permalink sp_Print

Bill said
The argument boils down to who's responsible. Clearly many adults are inclined to blame others 100% for their predicament, that's human nature, and so they are seeking 100% restitution. Personally I don't understand why my entering into a contract and freely signing a document, or my not obtaining documentation, etc, is 100% someone else's fault, zero % my fault, but I'm not the boss of the world (my granddaughter is) so maybe there will be 100% restitution, who knows?

If this investment had turned out as people thought it would, they would have been quite happy to have earned their 5% or whatever it was and to have achieved returns a fair bit higher than if they'd bought GICs, no further questions asked.

I'm not sure I can agree with the notion of differentiating between different degrees of risk awareness by various investors, I tend to think everybody should get the same resolution, somewhere between 0 - 100% for all.  

Not sure about you -but I don't invest in anything unless the principal is guaranteed.case closed.Does not matter how much the interest rate is.If I can't walk away with my principal I don't do it.As for paperwork-up until this mess came about I did not know I was supposed to get paperwork.The only reason I know I was to get paperwork is when I got the paperwork it said that.
I have never needed any for a GIC and as far as I knew this was not different.
Was I given bonds-nope.Why would I get bonds?Can they find the bonds-nope.
This was a sophisticated scam being played out in a credit union using PACE CREDIT UNION STAFF as the salespeople.Will they do the right thing? Depends on what the right thing is.And that depends on who you are.

July 6, 2020
1:31 pm
Doug
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4201
Member Since:
December 12, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
357sp_Permalink sp_Print

Norman1 said

Investor1 said
PCU Owns or owned PSC.

Owning an investment dealer doesn't make one an investment dealer.

Just like owning a dog doesn't make one a dog!  

Haven't followed this thread lately, but I think this is an unhelpful counter-factual argument.

Cheers,
Doug

July 6, 2020
3:02 pm
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6679
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
358sp_Permalink sp_Print

Elaine said

So what does accredited investor mean-my advisor probably should have been sent back to school
Because he was like woww you OWN A HOUSE-must be worth a million bucks-maybe two( I clarified to him it was a knockdown war house and was worth land value only-maybe 600 grand at the time).I had no idea that your house does not count so when he said YOU QUALIFY FOR THIS-I had no idea.HE was the advisor.I was the shmuck.At my own credit union being conned by a credit union employee As you all seem to know houses don't count for the Warren Buffet type investors.All I can think he did not know(the form does not specify what is to considered for the having a million bucks to throw a way category)or he did it intentional.Either way-as a credit union employee he was responsible for knowing his job and the longer this goes on the more stress I am under.

The $1 million and $5 million qualifications on the form for an accredited investor don't look that fuzzy to me:

Either alone or with your spouse, you own more than $1 million in cash and securities, after subtracting any debt related to the cash and securities.

Either alone or with your spouse, you have net assets worth more than $5 million. (Your net assets are your total assets (including real estate) minus your total debt.)

Then again, my concentration while reading that is not clouded by thoughts of what I'm going to do with my share of a $3,000 commission or finders' fee.

July 7, 2020
5:56 am
Elaine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
May 19, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
359sp_Permalink sp_Print

Norman1 said

Elaine said

So what does accredited investor mean-my advisor probably should have been sent back to school
Because he was like woww you OWN A HOUSE-must be worth a million bucks-maybe two( I clarified to him it was a knockdown war house and was worth land value only-maybe 600 grand at the time).I had no idea that your house does not count so when he said YOU QUALIFY FOR THIS-I had no idea.HE was the advisor.I was the shmuck.At my own credit union being conned by a credit union employee As you all seem to know houses don't count for the Warren Buffet type investors.All I can think he did not know(the form does not specify what is to considered for the having a million bucks to throw a way category)or he did it intentional.Either way-as a credit union employee he was responsible for knowing his job and the longer this goes on the more stress I am under.

The $1 million and $5 million qualifications on the form for an accredited investor don't look that fuzzy to me:

Either alone or with your spouse, you own more than $1 million in cash and securities, after subtracting any debt related to the cash and securities.

Either alone or with your spouse, you have net assets worth more than $5 million. (Your net assets are your total assets (including real estate) minus your total debt.)

Then again, my concentration while reading that is not clouded by thoughts of what I'm going to do with my share of a $3,000 commission or finders' fee.  

And for the sake of repeating myself to poor Norman I will say that there is no definition of "securities" on the form-that is how they got away with it -no one knowing what "securities" meant including the ADVISORS or ADVISERS whose job it was to know this.Either it was a scam or they were incredibly daft.And these are Pace Credit Union EMPLOYEES.
The fact that the managers of the credit unions did not seem to be aware of how many millionaires they had in their branches seems a bit odd to me.Have they been interviewed as part of the process?How about the other tellers who did NOT sell the securities-have they been interviewed?(these last two questions are for the PCU team monitoring the site-Good morning)

July 7, 2020
6:01 pm
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2748
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
360sp_Permalink sp_Print

Elaine said

And for the sake of repeating myself to poor Norman I will say that there is no definition of "securities" on the form-that is how they got away with it -no one knowing what "securities" meant including the ADVISORS or ADVISERS whose job it was to know this.Either it was a scam or they were incredibly daft.And these are Pace Credit Union EMPLOYEES.
The fact that the managers of the credit unions did not seem to be aware of how many millionaires they had in their branches seems a bit odd to me.Have they been interviewed as part of the process?How about the other tellers who did NOT sell the securities-have they been interviewed?(these last two questions are for the PCU team monitoring the site-Good morning)  

I am sure no managers at any bank branches know how many millionaires customers they have off the top of their heads.
The important question is did you actually sign a form that agrees to you are a acredited investor ? if you do, the legals are against you unfortunately.

Also where there is a definition of securities on the form is irrelevant. Essentially it asks for if the person has $1MM net investable assets. A house is not an investable asset and that should be obvious.

I dont think its fair to call all of PCU crooks and a scam. I think its only a handful of advisors who thru lack of knowledge and/or greed ended up peddling securities that may not be suitable for the investors. As such I cant say I agree PCU should make everybody whole. Just like those investors who invested in Nortel and Bre-X were not made whole by anybody, whether it is a scam or not.

Please write your comments in the forum.