Lawsuit filed against state's two 529 plans

Six people are suing the Education Trust Board of New Mexico, claiming it mismanaged two tax-sheltered funds they used to save money for their children's education.

[EasternSun]

I recently set up a 529 plan managed out of Virginia, for my young daughter. It, too, has lost value - some 60% in the past year. While the portfolio is feeling the fallout from recent market conditions, I figure the investment will recover some value in the future. I'm curious to know when these plaintiffs invested their money.... 10 years ago? 2 years ago?

[Eideard]

Let's see - invested money in market-driven equities - managed by a human being?

Grow up and take responsibility for your own actions.

There is no free lunch.

[redlightcamerasb ite]

Eideard wrote:

Let's see - invested money in market-driven equities - managed by a human being?
Grow up and take responsibility for your own actions.
There is no free lunch.

as usual some rt wing nut comes out to defend the greed of big business. these human beings should be held accountable, greed cannot be the driving factor when your investing in human beings future.

[GEORGE]

MY QUESTION IS FOR THE PLAINTIFFS..........
WHY MAKE IT A CLASS ACTION SUIT..??..IF THEY WIN...
THERE'S MORE TO DIVVY BEWTWEEN THE 6 THEN THE MANY 100'S OR 100'S OF INVESTORS.......
THE MANY ARE NOT PAY ATTNY FEES.......
LET THEM FILE THIER OWN COMPLAINT.......MAYBE ARE THE RESULTS OF THIS ARE IN.......

[murph55SantaFe]

Tough time all around.

[David Newmarker DDS]

How sad for these college students to have lost their funds due to the oversight of incompetent money-managers. I think the program manager should be replaced to eliminate a recurrence. Someone should be held responsible for this risk-taking.

[ted]

redlightcamerasbite wrote:

<quoted text>
as usual some rt wing nut comes out to defend the greed of big business. these human beings should be held accountable, greed cannot be the driving factor when your investing in human beings future.

Since when is it right wing to ask adults to be responsible for their decisions? No one made them do it.

[Victor]

I too lost money in this fund. The investment was supposed to be in a conservative fund 40% fixed income and 60% equity. You would think the fixed income would not lose money. Well that is the fund that lost big time because Oppenheimer invested in their own bond fund which was heavily into collateral debt obligations (i.e., mortgage backed securities which funded the subprime mess). If I knew a bond fund was heavily invested in CDO's I would never have invested in it. But Oppenheimer doesn't warn you that they are doing this and kept a heavy position in the CDO's even after the real estate market collapse. Personally, I think they intentionally unloaded these bad CDO's onto the 529 plans thinking no one would be the wiser. THIS WAS NOT A CASE OF INVESTORS KNOWINGLY ASSUMING A RISK AND LOSING. WE WERE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY OPPENHEIMER AND I'M SHOCKED THAT THEY ARE NOT A PARTY TO THIS LAW SUIT.

[Just Me]

The stock market goes up, the stock market goes down. That's what it does, over and over since the beginning of time. You can't sue just because your investments lost money. It's the responsibility of every investor to know exactly where their money is being invested and what the risks are.

What you CAN sue for though, blatant mismanagement or providing misleading/false information.

In this case, it seems like a toss-up. Yes, the state made a terrible choice in choosing a conservative asset-protecting fund choice. And yes, Oppenheimer was incompetent and perhaps mis-recommended those specific funds.

But fixed-income funds of this nature can and do lose money (read the disclaimers). Bonds, dividend-paying stocks, and other non-gov't fixed income investments are NOT guaranteed and vcan be very risky.

These people wanted an investment with little or no chance of loss and emphasis on capitol preservation, but yet THEY CHOSE a with investments not covered by insurance and with no guaranteed rate of return. Who's fault is that?

Anyone in a position of nearing retirement or otherwise needing their money soon should choose something safe, like CDs or government bonds.

>>"The investment was supposed to be in a conservative fund 40% fixed income and 60% equity."

By no means is a fund containing 60% stocks a "conservative" investment. The information regarding exactly where that sorts of investments the funds were involved with is freely available from the fund companies.

[Victor]

You must work for Oppenheimer. Comparable bond funds lost 3% while the Oppenheimer bond fund lost 40% in the same time period. Of course I expected the equity portion to drop with the market, but not the bond fund to the extent that it did. Even Oppenheimer admitted their mistake by replacing their own bond fund in March 2009 with a competitor's fund. They also fired their bond fund manager. You are arguing without knowing any facts of the case. If you knew the facts and this happened to you, you wouldn't be so smug about markets go up and down.

[Jim]

I came to this article via google search. I too invested in the education plan's 'conservative portfolio'. My investment allocation was 50% conservative, 25% aggressive, 25% moderately aggressive. In my case, the conservative money was earmarked for my daughters tuition bill that begins this August. Needless to say, the loss in the conservative fund far outpaced the losses in BOTH the aggressive and moderate risk portfolios. Something is amiss, and certainly the returns show that a prudent man rule was violated. Hopefully the State's Attorney General will investigate whether fraud was involved here, and not simply reckless mismanagement.