Securities Lawyers Blog
According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Armando Barron (Barron), previously associated with Irc Securities LLC, has at least one disclosable event. These events include one tax lien, alleging that Barron recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.
FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on January 08, 2025.
Without admitting or denying the findings, Barron consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he failed to provide his member firm adequate prior written notice of his private securities transactions. The findings stated that Barron participated in private securities transactions by soliciting investors, who were not customers of his firm, to enter into promissory notes with an LLC he owned and controlled. Barron personally solicited each noteholder and signed each note on behalf of the LLC. All investors in the notes received timely interest payments, and the LLC has repaid all investors’ principal. Barron partially disclosed his promissory note activity to his firm by amending his previous OBA disclosure concerning the LLC. In that amendment, Barron provided a copy of the promissory note and wrote that the money from the promissory notes is invested in a specific investment fund managed by the LLC. That disclosure was incomplete and inaccurate because, in fact, Barron also used the money for purposes other than investing in that fund, including non-income generating purposes. Ultimately, Barron solicited a total of 14 investors to enter into 30 promissory note transactions totaling $979,500. The findings also stated that Barron solicited individuals to invest in the promissory notes through communications that failed to comply with FINRA’s content standards for communications with the public. Barron disseminated communications about the notes that did not provide a fair and balanced treatment of their risks and benefits and failed to provide a sound basis for evaluating the facts concerning the notes. In addition, Barron disseminated communications about the notes that contained unwarranted, promissory, or misleading statements concerning the notes and made comparisons in retail communications between investments without disclosing all material differences between those investments.