Mortgage Brokernews

Latest Comments

• David Franklin 2019-02-20 4:33:35 PM How many of you invested starting June 1, 2016 and received independent legal advice? There could be a class action lawsuit for only those against the Law Society of Ontario, as that is when their notice could have been issued to the profession. If they had done that, Fortress probably have not been able to continue selling as it used the free independent legal as part of their marketing. How many of you relied upon the RRSP tax opinion issued by Norton Rose Fulbright in making your investment? Perhaps a class action lawsuit could be brought against them.

• TL 2019-02-20 1:11:10 PM What about resale? Margins builders make are less than you think with section 37 and doubled DC’s.

• David Franklin 2019-02-20 11:39:33 AM I posted this on Larry Elford's Facebook investor system fraud to create a synergy to have the politicians fund the police to reduce fraud and white collar crime. The Alberta 22,000 affected investors were failed by the Albert Securities Commission. It is because of the failure of these regulators that the public is being harmed. I just joined your group. I am a lawyer in Toronto and advising investors who were defrauded in the Fortress and Tier 1 mortgage frauds. I brought in the RCMP IMET to investigate Fortress the the OPP Serious Fraud Office to investigate Tier 1. This story is in the media on CBC Winnipeg and Toronto, Global Regina,Reuters, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Financial Post, Macleans and local newspapers in Barrie, St Catherines and more. You can Google david franklin syndicated mortgages to get more. This is not a securities problem as you had in Alberta but a failure of the Ontario regulator Financial Services Commission of Ontario that regulates mortgages and other sectors. Political action is needed to reduce fraud and other white collar crime and this is a Canadian problem. As you know from experience, regulators do not protect you. The governments must increase the police budgets to reduce these crimes and unless the public makes this a political issue, it will continue. To get more on this mortgage fraud issue and the harm it has caused read the postings from this link. We must all work together to get more people involved. My email is davidfranklin@rogers.com MORTGAGEBROKERNEWS.CA

• David Franklin 2019-02-19 4:22:08 PM On what basis do you think that Barry Segal could have issued his RRSP tax opinion letter that the initial Fortress first syndicated mortgage of nearly $17 million on a $4 million purchase the month before was RRSP eligible? There was no appraisal,only a future based opinion of value stating that the value for the land, without taking into account a reduction from its value based on the projected gross profit that could be made. The projected value of the land was $21.89 million. If a 20% allowance was made on the projected value of $72,042,875, the residual value of the land would have been about $7.5 million. The following is from the Olympia Trust investor RRSP document. “AND WHEREAS the Borrower has delivered Olympia Trust a legal opinion confirming th the Mortgage granted by the Borrower to the Lender is eligible for investment by the RRSP Account provided the amount of the First Priority Construction Loans and the Mortgage granted to all of the Junior Secured Lenders do not exceed the fair market value of the Lands.” The investor mortgage agreed to postpone to construction financing, but at the time the opinion was issued, it was a first mortgage. By the way Derek Sorrenti, whose office provided the independent legal advice had knowledge of the value of the property. Why didn’t his office disclose this information to investors? If this information was disclosed, do you think any anyone would have invested? On what basis did Barry Segal issue his tax opinion letter to Olympia Trust Company which was not licensed to do business in Ontario, especially since the Fortress investors were mostly in Ontario and could not be promoted or solicited to open RRSP accounts with Olympia Trust Company. Also remember that his firm was one of the law firms acting for Fortress Real Developments Inc., Fortress Real Capital Inc., Jawad Rathore and Vince Petrozza. Could it be said that he was in a conflict position when he issued his RRSP tax opinion?

• David Franklin 2019-02-19 2:35:22 PM So what happened with Fortress is not new news. Larry Elford is the voice of experience and knows that these frauds happen because of the failure of the regulators. In the Fortress fraud, FSCO, OSC for allowing Jawad and Vince to deal in mortgages and the Law Society of Ontario for not issuing its warning to the profession when it knew that the ILA was improper by the end of May 2016 and also that the RRSP tax opinion issued by Barry Segal of Norton Rose Fulbright was an issue, especially since it was issued to Olympia Trust, a trust company not licensed to do business in Ontario. The RCMP sworn information set out as one its reasons of the fraud was that the RRSP investment values were inflated.