Securities Lawyers Blog

Center Street Advisor Roy Williams Has Investment Complaints

April 12, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Advisor Roy Williams (Williams), currently employed by brokerage firm Center Street Securities, Inc. (Center Street Securities) but doing business as Williams Financial Group has been subject to at least seven customer complaints and one regulatory action during the course of his career. According to a BrokerCheck report the most recent customer complaints since 2017 concern 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.

In May 2020a customer complained that Williams violated the securities laws by alleging that Williams made unsuitable investments and failed to conduct due diligence on the investments made. The claim involves alternative investments, alleges $100,000 damages, and is currently pending.

DDPs include products such as non-traded REITs, oil and gas offerings, equipment leasing products, and other alternative investments. These alternative investments virtually never profit investors and are almost always unsuitable for investors because of their high fee and cost structure. Brokers selling these products are paid additional commission in order to hype these inferior quality investments providing a perverse incentives to create an artificial market for the investments.

Several studies have confirmed that Non-traded REITs underperform publicly traded REITs with some showing that Non-Traded REITs cannot even beat safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds. Brokers selling these products must disclose to the investor that non-traded REITs provide lower investment returns than treasuries while being high risk and illiquid – but almost never do. Because investors are not compensated with additional return in exchange for higher risk and illiquidity, these kinds of alternative investment products are rarely, if ever, appropriate for investors. Continue Reading

Advisor Marshall Isaacson Barred By Regulator After Suitability Investigation

April 11, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Advisor Marshall Isaacson (Isaacson), formally employed by brokerage firms National Securities Corporation (National Securities) and Newbridge Securities Corporation (Newbridge) has been subject to at least six customer complaints, one regulatory sanction, and three tax liens or judgements during the course of his career. According to a BrokerCheck report the customer complaints concerns 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.

One of the products referenced in the disclosures is GPB Capital. On February 4, 2021 the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York (DOJ), and seven states filed separate simultaneous actions against GPB Capital and other defendants connected to the firm accusing it of being a Ponzi-like scheme. In a press release the SEC stated that it “charged three individuals and their affiliated entities with running a Ponzi-like scheme that raised over $1.7 billion…”

As reported by Bloomberg “If proved, [GPB] would be one of the largest such schemes to target individual investors since the massive frauds of Bernard Madoff and Robert Allen Stanford came to light.” The DOJ indicted David Gentile, the founder of GPB, Jeffry Schneider, the owner and CEO of Ascendant Capital LLC, and Jeffrey Lash, a former managing partner of GPB relating to the fraud. If convicted, the defendants each face up to 20 years’ imprisonment.[1]

Advisor Peter Ianace Barred By Regulator Over Undisclosed Business Dealings – Investor Recovery Options

April 11, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are currently investigating claims that advisor Peter Ianace (Ianace) has been accused by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) of engaging in undisclosed outside business activities (OBAs). According to records kept by FINRA Ianace was employed by Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC (Wells Fargo) and Merrill Lynch Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (Merrill Lynch) through June 2020 when he abruptly resigned when he refused to cooperate in FINRA’s investigation over these allegations. If you have been a victim of Ianace’s alleged misconduct our firm may be able to assist you in recovering funds.

According to FINRA, the regulatory barred Ianace after he consented to the sanction that he refused to provide documents and information requested by FINRA in connection with its investigation into his potential failure to disclose outside business activities (OBAs) to his member firm.

Ianace’s BrokerCheck also reveals four customer complaints. The most recent allegation in January 2021 alleges unsuitable investment recommendations and misrepresentations from February 2013 until December 2019 and claims $18 million in damages. The claim is currently pending.

Adviser Michael Greenstone Accused of Making Unsuitable Investment Recommendations

April 10, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Adviser Michael Greenstone (Greenstone), currently employed at Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (Merrill Lynch), has been subject to at least nine customer complaints during the course of his career. Eight of the nine complaints against Greenstone allege unsuitability. In addition, Greenstone recently had nine customer complaints expunged in mass from his record using FINRA’s notoriously flawed expungement process. According to the PIABA Foundation, 1,078 expungement-only cases have been filed from 2015 to 2018. The study concluded that “The Finra [expungement] process is being systematically gamed, exploited and abused with one-sided hearings, manipulation of arbitrator selection, deletion of significant customer complaints and abusive (and possibly fraudulent) conduct to such an extent that it must be frozen until it can be repaired.”

According to a BrokerCheck report, there have been two complaints against Greenstone in the past two years alleging him of making unsuitable investment recommendations. The most recent allegation against Greenstone is pending and the customer is seeking $5 million in damages for unsuitable investment recommendations made from 2013 through 2019. Over the course of Greenstone’s career, several customers have accused him of making unsuitable investment recommendations. The aggregate settlement amount for his collective complaints is in excess of $240,000.00. Greenstones two largest reported settlements occurred in 2009 and in 1999. In July 2009, a customer alleged Greenstone placed her in a portfolio that was not suitable for her risk tolerance and age. This matter settled for approximately $114,000.00. Moreover, in July 1999, accused Greenstone of excessive and unsuitable trading. This matter settled for $106,000.00.

Advisor James G. Babineaux Accused of Making Unsuitable Investment Recommendations and Unauthorized Trading

April 10, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Advisor James Babineaux (Babineaux), currently employed by Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (Merrill Lynch) has been subject to at least two customer complaints during the course of his career. According to a BrokerCheck report the customer complaints concern unsuitable investment recommendations and unauthorized trading. In August 2018, a customer alleged Babineux engaged in unauthorized trading from July 26, 2018 through July 27, 2018. Additionally, that same year, another customer alleged that Babineux engaged in unsuitable investment recommendations and unauthorized trading from January 18, 2018 through July 27, 2018. Both matters settled for $1,322.21 and $2,853.93 respectively.

Unauthorized trading occurs when a broker sells securities without the prior consent from the investor. All brokers, who do not have discretionary authority to trade an account, are under an obligation to first discuss trades with the investor before executing them under NYSE Rule 408(a) and FINRA Rules 2510(b). Under the NASD Conduct Rule 2510(b), a broker is prohibited from trading in a non-discretionary customer account without prior written authorization from the customer. Unauthorized trading is a type of investment fraud because the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has found that disclosures of trades being made are essential and material to an investor. Unauthorized trading is often a gateway violation to other securities violations including churning, unsuitable investments, and excessive use of margin.

Adviser Stuart Henley Sanctioned by Regulator Over Trading Activity

April 9, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Adviser Stuart Henley, previously employed at Calton and Associates, Inc. (Calton), has been subject to a customer complaint, discharged for his handling of client accounts, and was suspended and fined by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). Additionally, Henley has also been subject to a tax lien. His most recent customer complaint alleges churning, excessive trading, and unsuitable trading.

According to a BrokerCheck report, in September 2016, a customer alleged that Henley excessively traded their account to gain commission. The matter was settled for $800,000. Moreover, in March 2018, Morgan Stanley discharged Henley for engaging in unauthorized trading. Thereafter, FINRA sanctioned Henley and he consented to findings that he exercised discretion in an elderly customer’s account without receiving acceptance of the account as discretionary by his member firm. Further, FINRA stated that although Henley had been given express or implied authority to exercise discretion in the account, the customer did not provide written authorization for Henley to exercise discretion. Moreover, according to FINRA Henley provided inaccurate responses on annual compliance questionnaires submitted to the firm by falsely indicating that he not exercised discretion in any customer account.

Wedbush Advisor David Hirons Has Suitability Customer Complaints

April 9, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial advisor David Hirons (Hirons), currently employed by Wedbush Securities Inc. (Wedbush Securities), has been subject to at least four customer complaints and one termination for cause during the course of his career. Hirons’s customer complaints alleges that Hirons recommended unsuitable investments in various investments including equities, futures funds, and options.

In April 2018 Hirons was discharged by RBC Capital Markets, LLC when the firm alleged that he was terminated for violating the firm’s order execution policy.

In August 2019 a customer complained that Hirons violated the securities laws by alleging that Hirons made investments recommendations that the client alleges involved options trading from June 2018 until December 2018 resulted in liquidations and losing funds. The claim alleged $712,080 in damages and settled for $65,000.

Advisor Stuart Pearl Sanctioned By Regulatory and Subject to Customer Complaints

April 8, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

According to BrokerCheck records financial advisor Stuart Pearl (Pearl), currently employed by International Assets Investment Management, LLC (International Assets) and formerly employed by David A. Noyes & Company (David A. Noyes) has been subject to five customer complaints, two terminations for cause, and one regulatory action during his career. According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the complaints against Pearl concern allegations of unsuitable investments, unauthorized trading, and margin trading among other causes of action.

In June 2015 Pearl was terminated by Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. (Ameriprise Financial) for violation of company policy related to use of discretion in non-discretionary accounts and complying with supervision.

In October 2017 FINRA sanctioned Pearl finding that Pearl consented to the sanctions and findings that he effected securities transactions in a customer’s account on several occasions on a discretionary basis without prior written authorization from the customer and without prior written acceptance of the account as discretionary from his member firm. FINRA also found that Pearl made unsuitable recommendations in two other customers’ joint brokerage account when he recommended the customers use margin to effect several trades. According to FINRA, the recommendations made by Pearl to purchase securities on margin were unsuitable in light of the customers’ investment objectives, risk tolerances, and their financial situation and needs. FINRA found that these purchases caused the account to be subject to seven margin calls during the relevant period.

In March 2019 David A. Noyes permitted Pearl to resign stating that Stuart Pearl resigned while on heightened supervision. The firm claims that Pearl had not followed his heightened supervision plan and would have been terminated had he not resigned.

Broker Audrey Croft Subject to Multiple Tax Liens and Several Customer Complaints

April 8, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Broker Audrey Croft (Croft), currently employed at Ameriprise Financial Services, LLC (Ameriprise), has been subject to at least three customer complaints and an astonishing ten tax liens during the course of her career. Her customer complaints allege misrepresentation and unsuitable recommendation.

Croft’s BrokerCheck report shows a substantial amount of disclosures (13). Over the course of her career, Croft has disclosed ten tax liens totaling approximately $80,000.00. Most recently, Croft disclosed two tax liens in April and October 2019 totaling approximately $600.00. In February 2012, Croft disclosed her largest tax lien totaling approximately $64,000.00. Large tax liens on a broker’s CRD can be a red flag that the broker may be influenced to engage in high commission activity in order to satisfy personal debts. FINRA discloses information concerning a broker’s financial condition because a broker’s inability to handle their own personal finances has also been found to be material information in helping investors determine if they should allow the broker to handle their finances.

Additionally, Croft has been alleged of making misrepresentations and unsuitable recommendations. In January 2019, a customer alleged Croft misrepresented the surrender charges and premium payments of an insurance policy. Additionally, in February 2009 a customer alleged Croft did not disclose the full details of a policy. The Broker Comment stated, “THE VUL POLICIES DID NOT APPEAR TO BE SUITABLE FOR THE CLIENTS’ INSURANCE NEEDS OR ABILITY TO SUSTAIN LARGE PAYMENTS AND THEY DID NOT APPEAR TO HAVE UNDERSTOOD THERE COULD BE SURRENDER CHARGES OR THE POLICIES COULD LAPSE.” This matter settled for approximately $37,000.00. Similarly, in September 2008, a customer alleged Croft of making unsuitable recommendations. This matter also settled in favor of the customer for approximately $44,000.00.

Broker Paul Porter Accused of Unauthorized Trading and Making Unsuitable Recommendations

April 7, 2021 | by Staff Attorney

Financial advisor Paul Porter, currently employed at Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC (Wells Fargo), has been subject to at least four customer complaints during the course of his career. His most recent customer complaints allege unauthorized trading and unsuitability. All of Porter’s complaints have occurred at Wells Fargo – his most recent place of employment. According to a BrokerCheck report, in 2018 Porter was accused of selling the client’s stock without her knowledge. This matter against him settled approximately $61,000.00. In 2012, another client accused porter of engaging in unauthorized trading. Then, in October 2008, another client accused porter of making unsuitable investments. This matter ultimately settled for $30,000.00.

Unauthorized trading occurs when a broker sells securities without the prior consent from the investor. All brokers, who do not have discretionary authority to trade an account, are under an obligation to first discuss trades with the investor before executing them under NYSE Rule 408(a) and FINRA Rules 2510(b). Under the NASD Conduct Rule 2510(b), a broker is prohibited from trading in a non-discretionary customer account without prior written authorization from the customer. Unauthorized trading is a type of investment fraud because the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has found that disclosures of trades being made are essential and material to an investor. Unauthorized trading is often a gateway violation to other securities violations including churning, unsuitable investments, and excessive use of margin.