Securities Lawyers Blog

Broker Alan Rose Receives Customer Complaints over Unsuitable Trades

July 21, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

Our law firm, Gana Weinstein LLP, is investigating claims made by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Alan Rose. The customer complaints allege that Rose engaged in securities law violations, including making unsuitable investments in clients’ accounts. The most recent customer complaint against the broker was filed in January 2017. The customer alleges during the period of 2013 – 2016, Rose over-concentrated their portfolio in unsuitable investments. The alleged damages are worth over $100,000. The case is currently pending.

Another complaint was filed against Rose in May 2015 alleging that the broker made unsuitable recommendations to their account. During the period of November 2011 through January 2013, Rose allegedly misrepresented and recommended unsuitable purchases of Puerto Rico municipal bond funds and New York State bonds. The alleged damages were worth $500,000 and the case was settled at $84,500.

Rose entered the industry in 1983. He is currently employed at Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC and has been employed there since January 2013. His previous employment includes: UBS Financial Services (October 2007 – February 2013), Morgan Stanley Inc. (April 2007 – October 2007), and Morgan Stanley DW Inc. (July 1983 – April 2007).

Financial Advisor Gary Rasmussen Receives Customer Complaints Over Unsuitability

July 20, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

Our law firm, Gana Weinstein LLP, is investigating claims made by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against advisor Gary Rasmussen. Rasmussen’s BrokerCheck records show customer complaints that allege that Rasmussen engaged in securities law violations, including making unsuitable investments in clients’ accounts.

The most recent customer complaint filed against Rasmussen was filed in October 2016. Allegedly, Rasmussen recommended investment products that were unsuitable and highly risky. The alleged damages are worth $178,892.00. The case is still pending.

In September 2012, a customer filed a complaint against Rasmussen alleging that the financial advisor recommended highly unsuitable investment products. Allegedly, Rasmussen also violated state and federal securities laws such as: failure to properly supervise, breach of his fiduciary duty, and lack of due diligence in the investment. The customer alleges that there was $475,000 in damages and the case is still pending.

Customers File Complaints Against Broker Sean Mcelduff

July 20, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating the customer complaints against Sean Mcelduff (Mcelduff). Mcelduff has been subject to two customer complaints – both of which pertain to suitability concerns over recommendations for investment products. Mcelduff’s BrokerCheck records from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) shows that the most recent customer complaint against Mcelduff was filed in December 2016. The customer alleged that Mcelduff made unsuitable recommendations of Puerto Rican municipal bonds. The alleged damages are worth $260,000. The case is still pending.

In January 2016, another customer complaint was filed against Mcelduff claiming that the broker allegedly purchased unsuitable bonds for the client. The alleged damages were priced at $21,000 and the case was settled for $12,000.

Brokers have a responsibility to treat investors fairly which includes obligations such as making only suitable investments for the client. In order to make a suitable recommendation the broker must meet certain requirements. First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation and due diligence into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. Second, the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives such as the client’s retirement status, long or short term goals, age, disability, income needs, or any other relevant factor.

Thrivent Investment Management Subject to Complaint by State of Illinois Over Variable Annuity Practices

July 18, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

According to a complaint filed by the State of Illinois Securities Department Thrivent Investment has been accused of engaging in replacing its client’s existing variable annuities for new variable annuities which requiring clients to pay surrender charges and various fees that were not appropriate for the client. Thrivent Investment violated Illinois law by allegedly: (1) failing to maintain and enforce a supervisory system and adequate written procedures to achieve compliance with the securities laws; (2) failing to adequately review the sales and replacements of Variable Annuities for suitability; (3) failing to enforce its written procedures regarding documentation of sales and replacements of Variable Annuities; and (4) failing to adequately train its salespersons to variable annuity transactions.

The lawyers at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented investors in their claims against brokerage firms for unsuitable investments in annuity products. Often times the benefits of variable annuities are outweighed by the terms of the contract that include exorbitant expenses such as surrender charges, mortality and expense charges, management fees, market-related risks, and rider costs.

According to the complaint as of December 31, 2016, for that year Thrivent Financial sold $2,902,000,000 of new Variable Annuity contracts nationwide. The firm was 11 out of 93 insurance company issuers for nationwide sales of Variable Annuities in 2016. In addition, for the period of August 1, 2013 through July 31, 2014, Thrivent Investment had nationwide commission sales revenue of $110,267,896 on the sale of variable annuities. Variable Annuities represented about 62% of Thrivent Investment’s total revenue, and 99% of all Variable Annuity sales were proprietary in that they were issued and offered by affiliates of Thrivent Investment.

Broker Scott Goldman Subject to Unsuitability Complaints

July 17, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

The investment fraud lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are examining multiple customer disputes filed with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Scott Goldman (Goldman). Goldman’s FINRA BrokerCheck record shows several disclosures mainly pertaining to unsuitable investments.

In December 2016, an elderly customer alleged that during Goldman’s employment at LPL Financial Corporation, he recommended highly unsuitable investments that were heavily concentrated in risky, leveraged precious metal products. In addition, the broker did not properly inform his client of the risks associated with such an investment. This dispute was settled in December 2016, and resulted in $10,000 penalty and Goldman was suspended from the industry.

Another case against Goldman was filed in October 2014 for allegedly making unsuitable recommendations, failing to supervise, and breaching his fiduciary duty during his employment at H. Beck Inc. The alleged damages were worth $250,000. The case was settled in November 2015 for $75,000.

Financial Advisor John Nelson Crook Receives Alleged Unauthorized Trading Complaints

July 17, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm is investigating customer disclosure claims concerning broker John Nelson Crook (Crook). Crook’s FINRA BrokerCheck record shows several disclosures of allegations concerning churning (excessive trading, unauthorized trading, unsuitability, and breach of fiduciary duty. His BrokerCheck records also show a disclosure concerning an employment separation after allegations.

In July 2015, Crook was discharged from Raymond James & Associates Inc due to the findings that that the financial advisor allegedly did not respond in a timely manner to a supervisory review of trading activity. In addition, Crook allegedly did not provide a legitimate explanation for the trading activity in a certain client’s account, which lead to his termination from the firm in July 2015.

The most recent customer complaint against Crook was received in November 2015.During the period between August 2006 and June 2015, Crook allegedly engaged in excessive and unauthorized trading. Crook allegedly also recommended unsuitable investment products to his client, fraudulently misrepresented, and breached his fiduciary duty. The alleged damages are worth over $4 Million and the case is currently pending.

Broker Elaine Marie Zito Subject to Multiple Customer Complaints

July 17, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

The securities fraud lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints concerning alleged misrepresentation and an employment separation filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) against broker Elaine Marie Zito (Zito). According to BrokerCheck records, Zito has been in the securities industry since 1997 and is currently working for Newbridge Securities Corporation (Newbridge) in Scottsdale, Arizona.

The most recent customer complaint against Zito was filed in April 2017 alleging that she misrepresented the client’s account regarding the purchase of a variable annuity back in 2006. Zito was employed at Woodbury Financial Services, Inc during the alleged misrepresentation. The case is currently pending.

During November 2016, Zito was discharged from Questar Capital Corporation (Questar) for allegedly violating the firm’s rules and regulations in relation to unauthorized use of discretion of mutual funds.

Nicolas Toadvine Subject to Customer Complaints Over REITs and Real Estate Investments

July 13, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

Calton & Associates, Inc. (Calton) broker Nicolas Toadvine (Toadvine) has been subject to numerous complaints over non-traded REITs and real estate related investments. According BrokerCheck Lynn has been subject to 12 customer complaints in total and declared bankruptcy in 2013. The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating the customer complaints against Toadvine.

Many of the complaints concern private placements and direct participation products (DPPs) such as non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs).

All of these investments come with high costs and historically have underperformed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds. For example, products like oil and gas partnerships, REITs, and other alternative investments are only appropriate for a narrow band of investors under certain conditions due to the high costs, illiquidity, and huge redemption charges of the products, if they can be redeemed. However, due to the high commissions brokers earn on these products they sell them to investors who cannot profit from them. Further, investor often fail to understand that they have lost money until many years after agreeing to the investment. In sum, for all of their costs and risks, investors in these programs are in no way additionally compensated for the loss of liquidity, risks, or cost.

Advisor Walter Starghill Terminated by Lincoln Investment Over Private Securities Transactions

July 13, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) advisor Walter Starghill (Starghill), in March 2017, was discharged by brokerage firm Lincoln Investment over allegations of Starghill’s “participation in a private securities transaction in violation of Firm policy.” In the industry all securities transactions, private investments, loans, or other financial transactions with the investing public must be disclosed and approved by the firm before the broker can engage in them.

At this time it is unclear what outside business activity Starghill was engaged in. According to Starghill’s disclosures he was involved with TSG Transportation LLC – a transportation service. FINRA requires brokers to disclose their outside businesses because the risk to investors is that the broker will use such businesses to engage in unauthorized securities activities. In addition, Starghill obtained a Series 6 license as opposed to a broader Series 7 license. A Series 6 license is a very limited license that only allows brokers to sell variable annuities and open end mutual funds. Sometimes brokers with Series 6 licenses engage in private securities transactions due to their limited license.

The providing of loans or selling of notes and other investments outside of a brokerage firm constitutes impermissible private securities transactions – a practice known in the industry as “selling away”.

Advisor Dion Padilla Sanctioned Over Variable Annuity Misconduct

July 12, 2017 | by Staff Attorney

In June 2016, Next Financial Group, Inc. (Next Financial) broker Dion Padilla (Padilla) was subject to a regulatory action brought by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) alleging Padilla effected an unauthorized purchase of a variable annuity for a customer and misrepresented that the investment was not a variable annuity. According to FINRA, the customer stressed to Padilla that they did not want any of their funds invested in a variable annuity due to the high fees associated with variable annuities and because of their desire for liquidity. But instead of following the customer’s instructions, FINRA found that Padilla presented a variable annuity application to the customer and assured him that the application was not for a variable annuity. In addition, FINRA found that Padilla caused the customer to invest an additional $558,889 into the variable annuity by falsely claiming that the investment purchased was not a variable annuity. FINRA found these statements to be misrepresentations that were all false and misleading.

In addition to the FINRA sanctions, Padilla has been subject to four customer complaints – many of which involve claims concerning variable annuity investments. The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are currently investigating customer complaints concerning this broker.

Variable annuities are complex financial and insurance products. In fact, recently the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a publication entitled: Variable Annuities: What You Should Know encouraging investors to ask questions about the variable annuity before investing. Essentially, a variable annuity is a contract with an insurance company under which the insurer agrees to make periodic payments to you. The investor chooses the investments made in the annuity and value of your variable annuity will vary depending on the performance of the investment options chosen. The primary benefits of variable annuities are the death benefit and tax deferment of investment gains.