fbpixel
888-840-1571

National Investment Fraud Lawyers

¿Perdió en bonos y fondos de Puerto Rico?

Options for Clients of Former Northland Securities, Inc. Broker Shawn Messner

Posted on Thursday, August 27th, 2020 at 7:11 pm    

Northland Securities

Did you suffer investment losses due to recommendations by former Northland Securities, Inc. broker Shawn Messner (CRD# 2759697)? Messner has been registered with Needham & Company, LLC in Minnetonka, Minnesota since 2019. Previously, Messner was registered with Northland Securities, Inc. in Minneapolis, Minnesota from 2008 to 2019.

In March 2020, Midwest Bank made allegations against Messner regarding, “Meadows One is in default of its payment obligations under the Note as it did not pay the monthly payments due December 20, 2019, January 20, 2020, February 20, 2020, and March 20, 2020. The sum of$2,339,196.84 plus late charges of$74,019.73 and interest of$39,571.41 for a total of $2,452,787.98 remains owing by Defendants-Respondents to Plaintiff-Claimant as of March 26, 2020, and interest continues to accrue at the default rate of interest of 11 % per annum thereafter.

Messner has been the subject of one customer complaint, according to his CRD report:

January 2020. “1.This matter arises out of a premeditated plan to defraud vendors and investors to invest in OrangeHook, as defined below, a start-up tech company with alleged “patented” security technology destined to make the company “highly profitable.” In reality, OrangeHook was and is an insolvent and failing company whose officers and directors orchestrated an investing scheme to entice Plaintiff, one of its shareholders, to invest nearly $1 million in exchange for purported licensing rights to OrangeHook’s alleged technologies as well as warrants for additional stock in OrangeHook. OrangeHook devised this investment scam with the help of Northland. Together, they conspired to create an elaborate series of financial transactions to conceal the true financial status of the company and target vendors and investors, like Plaintiff, to enter into and invest in licensing agreements for OrangeHook’s purported technology. 2. In 2016, Plaintiff first invested in OrangeHook. Northland, Plaintiffs long-time investment advisor, convinced Plaintiff to purchase $150,000 of units of preferred shares of Orangehook’s stock with the proviso that the company, with its leadership, could not miss. Although OrangeHook struggled between 2016 and 201 8, Northland falsely assured Plaintiff that OrangeHook was profitable when Plaintiff made periodic inquiries on, and raised many questions about, his investment. 3. In 2019, Plaintiff was personally introduced to OrangeHook by Steve Dragos at Northland to answer questions about the company and to discuss a confluence of potential business ventures related to OrangeHook’s technologies. The conversations centered on a presentation to Plaintiff about a purportedly lucrative investment opportunity to license OrangeHook’s technologies. OrangeHook subsequently solicited Plaintiff to engage in negotiations to enter into a licensing agreement to, among other things, assist certain retailers with the tracking and sale of cannabis products in Colorado. Over the course of several months, OrangeHook and Northland fraudulently misrepresented the financial status of the company, including its ability to deliver under any agreement, and the high rates of return the investment would generate in order to induce Plaintiff to enter into the license agreement. Equally important, OrangeHook also misrepresented the permissive use of its software and where it was being utilized. 4. Plaintiff ultimately entered into a licensing agreement with OrangeHook and paid OrangeHook $750,000 in licensing fees-which were to be used to refine the software so that it could be marketable for Plaintiff. OrangeHook, instead, used these fees to pay down its loan obligations as well as, upon information and belief, to pay officer salaries. Plaintiff, prior to entering into the agreement with OrangeHook, was unaware that OrangeHook was insolvent, delinquent on its tax obligations and facing a number of outstanding lawsuits and judgments. 5.After OrangeHook pocketed Plaintiffs $750,000, OrangeHook continued to solicit additional funds from Plaintiff. When Plaintiff did not immediately provide additional funding, OrangeHook sent a letter to Plaintiff, demanding he cease and desist from marketing OrangeHook’ s technologies to anyone in the cannabis industry-which was one, if not the, principal purpose Plaintiff entered into the licensing agreement. 6. Plaintiff now seeks to recoup the money he lost investing in OrangeHook as a result of the fraudulent scheme concocted by OrangeHook, Northland and their representatives.” The customer is seeking $800,000 in damages and the case is currently pending. The complaint took place while Messner was registered with Northland Securities, Inc. and was regarding banking products other than CDs.

Pursuant to FINRA Rules, member firms are responsible for supervising a broker’s activities during the time the broker is registered with the firm. Therefore, Northland Securities, Inc. may be liable for investment or other losses suffered by Messner’s customers.

Erez Law represents investors in the United States for claims against brokers and brokerage firms for wrongdoing. If and have experienced investment losses, please call us at 888-840-1571 or complete our contact form for a free consultation. Erez Law is a nationally recognized law firm representing individuals, trusts, corporations and institutions in claims against brokerage firms, banks and insurance companies on a contingency fee basis.