Reg BI

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Conrad Branson in Firm Kingswood Capital Partners, LLC

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Conrad Branson (Branson), currently associated with Kingswood Capital Partners, LLC, has at least 2 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, one regulatory event, alleging that Branson recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on August 23, 2022.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Branson consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he engaged in unauthorized trading in customer accounts held by the same family. The findings stated that Branson effected unauthorized transactions in the accounts without the family’s prior authorization, knowledge, or consent for the trades. Branson’s member firm has compensated the family $78,919 for losses resulting from the unauthorized transactions. The findings also stated that Branson exercised discretionary authority in some of the family’s accounts without obtaining prior written authorization from the family and without having the accounts accepted as discretionary accounts by the firm. Branson also exercised discretionary authority in two other customers’ accounts without obtaining prior written authorization from the customers and without having the accounts accepted as discretionary accounts by the firm.

Broker Daniel Lauletta in IBN Financial Services, INC. Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Daniel Lauletta (Lauletta), previously associated with IBN Financial Services, INC., has at least 3 disclosable events. These events include 2 customer complaints, one regulatory event, alleging that Lauletta recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on September 01, 2022.

Arkansas Securities Commissioner J. Campbell McLaurin entered consent order number S-20-0046-22-OR02 in the matter of Daniel J. Lauletta (CRD# 2659123) on September 1, 2022, based upon Lauletta’s activity as an investment adviser representative with two Arkansas clients. Lauletta breached his fiduciary duty to two Arkansas clients by advising them to liquidate securities invested for retirement to purchase unsuitable insurance products and annuities. Lauletta did not have reasonable grounds for believing the advice and recommendations at issue were suitable for the Arkansas clients. Lauletta also failed disclose certain risks and information to the Arkansas clients when effecting the above-referenced activity. Lauletta’s activity constituted fraudulent, deceptive, dishonest, or unethical practices of an investment adviser, in violation of the Arkansas Securities Act (‘Act’), Ark. Code. Ann. \\u00a7\\u00a7 23-42-307(a)(3), 23-42-308(a)(2)(B) and (G), and 23-42-507(2), and Rules of the Arkansas Securities Commissioner (‘Rules’) 308.02(a) and 308.02(aa). Without admitting or denying the findings of fact and conclusions of law, Lauletta consented to the following: 1) cease and desist from further violations of the Act and Rules; 2) revocation of his broker-dealer agent registration in Arkansas as of April 12, 2022, the last date on which Lauletta’s registration was effective in Arkansas; 3) not to reapply for registration with the Arkansas Securities Department (‘Department’) in any capacity for a minimum of five years on or after the entry of the consent order; and 4) payment of a fine to the Department in the amount of $10,000.00 immediately upon entry of the consent order.

Broker Paul Vizanko in Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Paul Vizanko (Vizanko), previously associated with Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC, has at least 3 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, 2 regulatory events, alleging that Vizanko recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

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

Respondent Vizanko failed to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement or to satisfactorily respond to a FINRA request to provide information concerning the status of compliance.

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Christ Baltas in Firm Worden Capital Management LLC

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Christ Baltas (Baltas), previously associated with Worden Capital Management LLC, has at least 6 disclosable events. These events include 3 customer complaints, 3 regulatory events, alleging that Baltas recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on October 07, 2022.

Respondent Baltas failed to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement or to satisfactorily respond to a FINRA request to provide information concerning the status of compliance.

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Neil Fineman in Firm First Allied Securities, INC.

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Neil Fineman (Fineman), previously associated with First Allied Securities, INC., has at least 3 disclosable events. These events include 2 customer complaints, one regulatory event, alleging that Fineman recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on August 18, 2022.

Respondent Fineman failed to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement or to satisfactorily respond to a FINRA request to provide information concerning the status of compliance.

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Robert Calamunci in Firm Xnergy Financial LLC

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Robert Calamunci (Calamunci), previously associated with Xnergy Financial LLC, has at least 2 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, one regulatory event, alleging that Calamunci recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on October 20, 2022.

Respondent Calamunci failed to respond to FINRA requests for information.

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Barry Garapedian in Firm Morgan Stanley

January 12, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Barry Garapedian (Garapedian), previously associated with Morgan Stanley, has at least 2 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, one regulatory event, alleging that Garapedian recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on November 28, 2022.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Garapedian consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he caused his member firm to maintain inaccurate books and records by falsifying the representative code for trades in the firm’s order entry system, causing the firm’s trade confirmations to show an inaccurate representative code. The findings stated that Garapedian and other registered representatives working from the same branch office entered into an agreement through which they agreed to service certain customer accounts, including executing trades for those accounts, under a joint representative code that they shared with the estate of a retired representative. The agreement set forth what percentages of the commissions the estate of the retired representative, Garapedian, and the other representatives earned on trades placed using the joint representative code. Although the firm’s system correctly prepopulated the trades with a joint representative code Garapedian shared with the estate of the retired representative, he directed a junior registered representative to enter transactions under different joint representative codes through which he received a higher percentage of commissions than what he was entitled to receive pursuant to the agreement. Garapedian also directed the junior registered representative to enter additional trades under different joint representative codes through which he received a lower percentage of commissions than what he was entitled to receive pursuant to the agreement. Garapedian mistakenly assumed that he had permission to change the representative codes in this manner to equalize commissions earned by him and the other registered representatives across accounts serviced by the branch office, including those covered by the joint production agreement. However, Garapedian had not verified that the estate of the retired representative agreed that he could change the representative code for the transactions at issue. As a result, Garapedian’s actions caused the firm’s trade confirmations to inaccurately reflect another joint representative code instead of the joint representative code that Garapedian shared with the estate of the retired representative. Garapedian’s actions resulted in his receiving higher commissions and the retired representative’s estate receiving less commissions from the trades than what each was entitled to receive pursuant to the agreement. The firm has since paid restitution of approximately $8,000 to the estate of the retired representative, which is the approximate amount of additional commissions Garapedian received as a result of changing the representative code on the trades.

Broker Joshua Nicholas in Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 11, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Joshua Nicholas (Nicholas), previously associated with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, has at least 5 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, 4 regulatory events, alleging that Nicholas recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on April 24, 2023.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (‘Commission’) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (‘Advisers Act’) against Joshua David Nicholas (‘Nicholas’ or ‘Respondent’). The Commission finds that on April 19, 2023, a final judgment was entered by consent against Nicholas, permanently enjoining him from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (‘Securities Act’), and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘Exchange Act’) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, in the civil action entitled Securities and Exchange Commission v. Empires Consulting Corp., et al., 1:22-cv-21995-CMA, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The Commission’s complaint alleged that Nicholas and others fraudulently raised at least $40 million of investor funds in EmpiresX investments by falsely claiming that EmpiresX could earn an expected investment return through a proprietary trading ‘bot’ or by manual trading performed by Nicholas. In reality, the bot was fake, Nicholas and others traded only a fraction of the funds they took from investors, and that limited trading failed to earn the purported return. Nicholas and others further lied to investors to provide assurances of the safety of their investment, including by falsely telling investors that EmpiresX had filed SEC registration paperwork. Instead, Nicholas and others misappropriated that investor money for personal uses such as cars, real estate, and travel. The complaint also alleged that Nicholas and others sold unregistered securities. On September 8, 2022, Nicholas pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. \\u00a7 371, 15 U.S.C. \\u00a7\\u00a7 78j(b) and 78ff, and 17 C.F.R. \\u00a7 240.10b-5, before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, in United States v. Joshua David Nicholas, 1:22-cr-20296-JEM. In connection with that plea, Respondent admitted that he conspired with others to commit securities fraud by offering EmpiresX investments through devices, schemes, and artifices to defraud, and materially false statements and omissions. Specifically, Respondent admitted that the purported EmpiresX bot was not real, and that EmpiresX was instead a Ponzi scheme that paid earlier investors with money obtained from later investors. Respondent further admitted that in marketing EmpiresX investments, he misrepresented himself as another individual in order to conceal from investors and potential investors his prior disciplinary history.

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Patrick Perugino in Firm Craft Capital Management LLC

January 11, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Patrick Perugino (Perugino), currently associated with Craft Capital Management LLC, has at least 2 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, one regulatory event, alleging that Perugino recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on December 05, 2022.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Perugino consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he exercised discretion in customer accounts to effect trades without prior written authorization from the customers and without his member firms having accepted the accounts as discretionary in writing. The findings stated that for one of the customers, Perugino exercised discretion in placing a trade in the customer’s account while Perugino was associated with one of his firms. With respect to the other customers, Perugino engaged in discretionary trading by placing numerous trades in their accounts while these accounts were at his other firms. Although one of the firm’s WSPs permitted discretionary accounts, Perugino did not follow the firm’s procedures to obtain written authorization from the customers or seek approval from the firm to maintain any discretionary accounts at the firm. Instead, Perugino failed to disclose the discretionary trading, incorrectly marking on two firm annual attestations that he did not handle any customer accounts on a discretionary basis.

Broker Miche Jean in Morgan Stanley Firm Has Customer Complaint

January 11, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Miche Jean (Jean), previously associated with Morgan Stanley, has at least 4 disclosable events. These events include one customer complaint, 3 regulatory events, alleging that Jean recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on March 10, 2023.

Jean was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he failed to provide information and documents and appear for on-the-record testimony requested by FINRA in connection with its investigation into whether he converted money from his customer through fraudulent ACH transfers to pay his personal credit card.