Human Financial Advisor Horror Stories

In the fall of the year 2005 and when the real estate market was going crazy and all kinds of real estate investors were giving speeches and masquerading as advisors, I attended a local seminar about real estate investing.

I already had my rural land property/investment business model developed and most of my current advisors in place. A mortgage broker was speaking about loans for real estate.

These so called mortgage financial advisors were recommending people take interest only loans to fund their real estate purchases because the rates were low and it cash flows easily. There are many problems with this dumb advice.

Here are some:

• Debt at some point has to be paid back. Anybody who has done any investing and used debt with real estate, stocks, or a business knows this. Delaying indefinitely paying off a debt is foolish.
• Even if an interest only loan for any type of investment cash flows today, it might not tomorrow, next month, or next year. The investment might quit paying. For example:
• The tenant lost his/her job. The property flip did not work as the foundation crack was not discovered during the euphoria when the property was bought. Funds (from more debt) were needed to fix the crack when an engineer who looked at the property to buy it discovered it.

In 2005, I was advised by a group of real estate investors. One who says he owns 50 different properties with many partners. He advised if I do not have money for investing, I should use my identity for prospect investors to use to purchase property and I get a small share. At the time, people made lot of money and different kind of real estate financial schemes.

Definitely it is a bad advice because if the investors default the loans, you are ultimately responsible for the loans and the properties are under the water.

I once had a person come to me who was very disgruntled with their current financial advisor. They had lost more money than they’d wanted to and really didn’t understand what they had. When I had a chance to take a look at their mutual fund portfolio, I noticed that all they had were B-Share mutual funds.

For those of you who don’t know, B-Shares, for the most part, are now non-existent. Although I can’t be certain why, my hunch is that they aren’t around anymore because too many advisors abused them. If they could still sell them, the advisor could make a handsome commission, and the client would never know.

Now, it’s not the commission on the B-Share that makes them so bad; it’s the fact that most of them had a six- to seven-year surrender period. That means if you buy the fund, you’re going to have to hold it for at least six or seven years before you can liquidate it without a penalty.

The client in my office had no idea what a B-Share was, and most importantly, had no idea that she had a surrender charge attached to it. So here she is—stuck in investments that had lost more money for her than she had wanted, and she can’t do anything about it. If she did sell it, she’d have to pay a surrender charge on top of her losses. Talk about a slap in the face.

Lesson learned: Read all the fine print and make sure you understand if your investment product has any type of surrender charge attached to it.

A financial services guy told a lunch group that it made no difference whether people donated appreciated stock directly to a charity or sold it and donated the proceeds to charity. He claimed that, either way, “you still got the charitable deduction. ”While this is true, he completely ignored the capital gains tax that would be triggered when the person (rather than the charity) sold the appreciated stock. He could not comprehend that a direct donation of the appreciated stock to charity could save the donor from having to pay tax on that capital gain.

He was totally obsessed with the relatively minor charitable deduction on their tax return. I thought this was horrible advice and a disservice to anyone who followed his financial advice.