Alternative Investment

Broker Michael Lancaster in Ifp Securities, LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Previously financial advisor Michael Lancaster (Lancaster), previously employed by brokerage firm Ifp Securities, LLC has been subject to at least 2 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, one regulatory event. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on November 11, 2022.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Lancaster consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he recommended that a customer, who was 72 years old at the time, invest $70,000 in shares of a commercial equipment leasing and finance fund, which was an alternative investment, even though the investment was inconsistent with the customer’s investment profile and financial situation. The findings stated that the liquid net worth required for the customer’s investment amount, as stated in the investment prospectus, exceeded the customer’s liquid net worth. In addition, the high-risk and illiquid nature of the investment was not consistent with the customer’s moderate risk tolerance. Yet, the customer used funds from his retirement account to make the investment. Even though the investment subsequently declined in value, the customer continued to hold the investment based on Lancaster’s recommendation that he do so. The investment continued to decline in value until the customer liquidated the investment nearly 10 years later. The customer sustained losses and was compensated by Lancaster’s member firm. The findings also stated that after the customer complained to Lancaster about the performance of the investment, Lancaster made payments to the customer totaling $14,460.40 to attempt to settle the complaint without the knowledge or approval of his firm. The findings also included that Lancaster submitted compliance questionnaires to his firm falsely stating that he had not made any private settlement of claims or reimbursed customers for losses. Subsequently, the customer, through his attorney, sent a written complaint to the firm regarding Lancaster, including Lancaster’s attempt to settle his complaint.

Broker Mark Martino in the Benchmark Company, LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Currently financial advisor Mark Martino (Martino), currently employed by brokerage firm the Benchmark Company, LLC has been subject to at least 3 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, 2 regulatory events. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on August 15, 2022.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Martino consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he failed to conduct reasonable ongoing due diligence for a private placement offering by a Canadian start-up company. The findings stated that Martino learned that the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had sued the company’s founder for fraud in connection with a different company that he had previously founded. Martino also learned that the FTC had obtained a court order freezing the founder’s assets as well as the assets of any companies he owned or controlled. Before the start of the offering’s selling period, Martino recognized the FTC’s lawsuit against the founder to be a red flag given his role with the company. After selling began, the FTC sought to freeze all of the company’s assets and to hold the company’s chief executive officer (CEO) in contempt for funneling the company’s assets to the founder for his personal use. Martino was unaware of these developments during the three-month offering period because he unreasonably relied on the issuer to keep him apprised of developments in the lawsuit, even though some prospective investors were reluctant to invest due to concerns with the lawsuit and one investor demanded his money back after learning of the lawsuit. Shortly after the end of the selling period, the court held the CEO in contempt and issued an order requiring the company to transfer $1.205 million to a court-appointed receiver. The company subsequently failed to repay the investors in the offering when the debenture units matured. Martino personally received $61,248 in placement agent fees from sales of the offering subsequent to the developments in the FTC lawsuit. The findings also stated that Martino recommended the offering to his member firm’s customers without a reasonable basis. Martino did not request a written explanation of the FTC lawsuit from the issuer, did not take steps to verify oral representations regarding developments in the lawsuit, did not review the lawsuit’s public docket, and took no steps to otherwise track developments in the lawsuit. By failing to conduct reasonable ongoing due diligence of an acknowledged red flag, Martino failed to timely learn of material developments in the FTC lawsuit and thus did not have a reasonable understanding of the potential risks of the offering. As such, Martino lacked a reasonable basis to continue to recommend the offering to customers. The findings also included that Martino failed to reasonably supervise the firm’s due diligence of the offering. Martino was the representative at the firm who conducted the due diligence of the offering, and was also the firm’s designated supervisor for diligence of private placements. In addition, Martino was the firm’s CEO and the designated supervisor for its main office. Given his roles, Martino was responsible for implementing the firm’s supervisory system including as it related to private placements. The firm’s written supervisory procedures (WSPs) required the firm to conduct due diligence of each private placement offered by the firm and to update its due diligence as needed until effectiveness of the offering. Martino and his firm, however, did not implement a reasonable process for conducting ongoing due diligence. While the firm’s WSPs also required it to review any red flags and not simply rely on representations by the issuer’s management, the procedures did not specifically address continuing monitoring of identified red flags as part of the firm’s ongoing due diligence. FINRA found that Martino used text messaging applications on his personal cell phone to communicate with the company’s founder, CEO, and prospective investors regarding the offering. Those communications, which concerned the firm’s securities business, were not preserved by the firm. As a result, Martino caused his firm to fail to preserve required books and records.

Broker Elba Nogueras in First Southern, LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 10, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Previously financial advisor Elba Nogueras (Nogueras), previously employed by brokerage firm First Southern, LLC has been subject to at least 2 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, one regulatory event. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on September 18, 2023.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Nogueras consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that she willfully violated the Care Obligation of Rule 15l-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Reg BI) by recommending that her customer, a 52-year-old, invest in an illiquid, non-traded real estate investment trust (REIT) without having a reasonable basis to believe the investment was in the customer’s best interest. The findings stated that the prospectus cautioned that investments in the non-traded REIT involved a high degree of risk and could have resulted in a complete loss of principal. Based upon Nogueras’ recommendation, her customer invested $81,000, which represented 81 percent of the customer’s liquid net worth, in the non-traded REIT, resulting in Nogueras earning a commission of $5,670. Given the risk and illiquidity of investments in the non-traded REIT, Nogueras lacked a reasonable basis to believe her recommendation was in the best interest of the customer, who had a moderate risk tolerance and limited investment experience.

Broker Mario Divita in Traderfield Securities INC. Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 10, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Previously financial advisor Mario Divita (Divita), previously employed by brokerage firm Traderfield Securities INC. has been subject to at least 3 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, 2 regulatory events. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on September 05, 2023.

Without admitting or denying the findings, the firm and Divita consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that they failed to establish, maintain, and enforce a supervisory system, including WSPs, reasonably designed to achieve compliance with rules governing registered representatives proposed OBAs. The findings stated that the firm and Divita knew that two of the firm’s representatives were engaged in outside activities that involved investment funds and private placement offerings, but neither the firm nor Divita evaluated the activities to determine whether they constituted outside securities activities. The representatives owned and received a fee for managing investment funds that raised $60 million from over 200 individual investors. The representatives presented the investment funds to the firm and Divita in discussions and emails as OBAs, so they understood that the representative’s OBAs were investment-related. However, neither Divita nor anyone else at the firm evaluated the representative’s proposed activities to determine whether they should be restricted or prohibited; whether they should have been treated as outside securities activities, with any transactions recorded on the firm’s books and records; and whether they would interfere with or otherwise compromise the representatives’ responsibilities to the firm or the firm’s customers, or be viewed as part of the firm’s business. In addition, the firm’s WSPs did not reference or otherwise require the firm to comply with the requirements of FINRA Rule 3270.01 or the factors listed there.

Broker Jeffrey Warren in Vanderbilt Securities, LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 7, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Currently financial advisor Jeffrey Warren (Warren), currently employed by brokerage firm Vanderbilt Securities, LLC has been subject to at least one disclosable event. These events include one customer complaint. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a pending customer complaint with a damage request of $100,000.00 on August 04, 2024.

The claimant alleges that financial advisor made unsuitable recommendations by concentrating nearly $300,000 of retirement assets into illiquid, high-commission private placements and non-traded REITs. These investments were misrepresented as safe, lacked transparency, and were inappropriate for retirees. The advisors also engaged in options trading within IRA accounts, resulting in losses estimated between $100,000 and $500,000.

Broker Kim Monchik in Spartan Capital Securities, LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 2, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Currently financial advisor Kim Monchik (Monchik), currently employed by brokerage firm Spartan Capital Securities, LLC has been subject to at least 3 disclosable events. These events include 2 customer complaints, one regulatory event. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a pending customer complaint on November 24, 2025.

Monchik was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that her member firm willfully violated Regulation Best Interest’s Care Obligation under Rule 15l-1(a)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Reg BI) by failing to have a reasonable basis to recommend investments to customers. The complaint alleges that the firm recommended securities that had a total principal value of over $24 million to 191 customers, the majority of whom were retail customers, through 16 private placement offerings (the Offerings). The firm, through Monchik, failed to conduct reasonable due diligence on the Offerings. The firm generated over $2.4 million in placement fees from these unsuitable recommendations. The complaint also alleges that in connection with the offer and sale of membership interests in the issuers of these Offerings, which were three unregistered, private investment funds (collectedly, the Atlas Funds), the Respondents recklessly or, at minimum, negligently disseminated, or caused the dissemination of, false and misleading information to Atlas Funds’ investors, in contravention of Sections 17(a)(2) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933 (‘Securities Act’). The private placement memoranda (PPMs) misrepresented that Atlas Funds would not profit from any markup charged to customers in connection with their investments in the Offerings. Further, the Supplements misrepresented the price at which Atlas Funds purchased the membership interests in pre-IPO shares and from which entity the Atlas Funds acquired those interests. The Respondents also obtained money by means of the untrue statements when they raised capital from Atlas Fund investors (i.e., firm customers), in the Offerings and when they obtained placement fees, markups, and/or management fees. In total, the Atlas Funds and its manager, at the CEO’s direction, charged customers $3.25 million in markups, which directly benefitted the CEO, who owned and controlled those entities. As a result, the Respondents concealed the CEO’s additional compensation and the full extent of his economic self-interest in the Offerings. The complaint further alleges that the firm willfully violated its Disclosure Obligations under Reg BI by failing to fully and fairly disclose in writing conflicts of interest associated with its recommendations of investments in the Offerings. The offering documents did not fully and fairly disclose material facts related to the CEO’s ownership of the Atlas Funds and economic incentive to have firm representatives recommend the private placements in the Offerings; and Monchik’s role managing the Atlas entities and performing due diligence on the Offerings for both the Atlas Funds and the firm. In addition, the complaint alleges that the firm and Monchik failed to establish a supervisory system, including WSPs, reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the Care Obligation of Reg BI as it relates to private placement offerings. The firm also willfully violated Reg BI by failing to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the Care Obligation of Reg BI. Moreover, the complaint alleges that the firm and Monchik failed to reasonably supervise the Offerings, including by failing to conduct reasonable due diligence on the Offerings, failing to maintain any records reflecting any due diligence that was completed on the Offerings, and failing to reasonably respond to red flags concerning the private investment funds’ ownership of the pre-IPO shares involved in the offerings. Furthermore, the complaint alleges that the firm and Monchik, who was responsible for maintaining and updating the firm’s WSPs, failed to establish, maintain, and enforce written Conflict of Interest Procedures. The firm had no written policies or procedures addressing the identification, disclosure, or mitigation of conflicts of interest. As a result, the firm willfully violated Reg BI.

Broker Andrew Marschall in Pnc Investments Firm Has Customer Complaint

December 30, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

Previously financial advisor Andrew Marschall (Marschall), previously employed by brokerage firm Pnc Investments has been subject to at least one disclosable event. These events include one customer complaint. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a settled customer complaint with a damage request of $100,001.00 on December 09, 2021.

Client alleges breach of fiduciary duty related to unsuitable recommendation of non-traded REIT.

Broker Rey Descalso in J.w. Cole Financial, INC. Firm Has Customer Complaint

December 29, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

Currently financial advisor Rey Descalso (Descalso), currently employed by brokerage firm J.w. Cole Financial, INC. has been subject to at least one disclosable event. These events include one customer complaint. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a settled customer complaint with a damage request of $50,000.00 on December 20, 2021.

Client alleges a REIT and BDC purchased were unsuitable.

Broker Darryl Ferguson in LPL Financial LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

December 29, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

Previously financial advisor Darryl Ferguson (Ferguson), previously employed by brokerage firm LPL Financial LLC has been subject to at least one disclosable event. These events include one customer complaint. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a settled customer complaint with a damage request of $500,000.00 on December 22, 2021.

Claimants allege registered representative recommended unsuitable non-traded REIT investments.

Broker Bradley Goodbred in LPL Financial LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

December 28, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

Previously financial advisor Bradley Goodbred (Goodbred), previously employed by brokerage firm LPL Financial LLC has been subject to at least one disclosable event. These events include one customer complaint. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a settled customer complaint with a damage request of $1,613,981.30 on January 06, 2022.

Customer alleges that representative caused her to execute a document appointing representative as her power of attorney, and that representative allegedly induced customer to invest in a fraudulent, unregistered security. Activity period 2009 to 2020.