Securities Lawyers Blog
Retirement savers who have suffered IRA investment losses or other retirement account losses often have claims they are not aware of. Brokerage firms such as Chapin, Davis owe their customers a duty of care, and a breach of fiduciary duty, a breach of contract, or negligent supervision of a financial advisor can make a firm liable for the resulting losses. The investment loss lawyers at Gana Weinstein LLP represent retirees and other investors in FINRA arbitration claims to recover those losses.
Chapin Davis is a broker-dealer and investment adviser that offers brokerage in equities, corporate, municipal and government bonds, mutual funds and annuities, along with financial planning, portfolio management, private placements and merger advisory services for individuals, businesses and institutions. Organized in Maryland in 1990, the firm is headquartered in Baltimore and clears through Wells Fargo Clearing Services.
Chapin, Davis – By the Numbers:
- CRD #: 28116
- Regulatory Events: 11
- Arbitration Events: 1
- Broker Employees: 25
Chapin, Davis – Investment Advisors:
- SEC #: 70987
- Assets Under Management: $642,788,940
- ADV Form Employee: 26
Chapin, Davis – In the News:
FINRA v. Chapin, Davis (Case #2022073322201) – On 17 days between August 2021 and May 2022, Chapin Davis conducted a securities business while failing to maintain the required minimum net capital and failed to notify the SEC or FINRA of those deficiencies. The firm’s miscalculations also caused it to maintain inaccurate books and records and file 11 inaccurate Financial and Operational Combined Uniform Single (FOCUS) reports between April 2021 and December 2022. The firm also failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system, including written supervisory procedures, reasonably designed to achieve compliance with its net capital and recordkeeping obligations, as well as the Compliance Obligation of Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) between June 30, 2020 and June 2023. As a result of this conduct, Chapin Davis violated Sections 15(c)(3) and 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Exchange Act Rules 15c3-1, 15l-1(a)(1), 17a-3, 17a-5, and 17a-11, and FINRA Rules 4110(b)(1), 4511, 3110, and 2010.
FINRA v. Chapin, Davis (Case #2018056386601) – From March 2016 to April 2018 (the “Relevant Period”), Chapin, Davis failed to implement its written Customer Identification Program (“CIP”), as required by FINRA Rule 3310(b). During the Relevant Period, the Firm also failed to implement its written AML policies and procedures relating to the detection and reporting of suspicious transactions, as required by FINRA Rule 3310(a). As a result, the Firm violated FINRA Rules 3310(a) and (b) and 2010.
A brokerage firm’s regulatory history is often important evidence in a FINRA arbitration claim. If you lost money at Chapin, Davis, the securities arbitration attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP can review the firm’s record alongside your accounts, free of charge.