Barclays Capital Inc.

Barclays Capital Inc. Investor Attorney

October 20, 2026 | by Staff Attorney

Our law firm represents individual and institutional investors that have been mistreated by their brokers and brokerage firms, such as Barclays Capital Inc.. Many investors do not recognize broker misconduct in their accounts, and those that do are often hesitant to seek help. Broker misconduct spans many issues that violate industry rules, including unauthorized trading, breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitable asset allocation, and churning. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP can analyze your accounts and investments to determine if there was misconduct in the handling of your account.

Barclays Capital Inc. is the U.S. broker-dealer of Barclays, underwriting and dealing in corporate, municipal, government, and asset-backed securities, trading listed options and futures, and providing prime brokerage, clearance, and financing services. Headquartered in New York with branch offices in cities including Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, the firm serves money managers, insurers, pension and hedge funds, corporations, governments, and central banks.

Barclays Capital Inc. – By the Numbers:

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Akshay Niranjan in Firm Barclays Capital Inc.

March 7, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Akshay Niranjan (Niranjan), previously associated with Barclays Capital Inc., has at least one disclosable event. These events include one tax lien, alleging that Niranjan recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on January 13, 2025.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (‘Commission’) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Akshay Niranjan (‘Respondent’). In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondent has submitted an Offer of Settlement which the Commission has determined to accept. The commission finds that On October 31, 2022, a judgment was entered by consent against Niranjan, permanently enjoining him from future violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, in the civil action entitled Securities and Exchange Commission v. Brijesh Goel & Akshay Niranjan, Civil Action Number 1:22-CV-06282, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Commission’s complaint alleged that Niranjan committed unlawful insider trading in the securities of four issuers while employed by the global corporate banking institution. On July 23, 2022, Niranjan entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York concerning the conduct alleged in the Commission’s complaint.

Broker Jin Lim in Barclays Capital Inc. Firm Has Customer Complaint

March 5, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Jin Lim (Lim), previously associated with Barclays Capital Inc., has at least one disclosable event. These events include one tax lien, alleging that Lim recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on January 29, 2025.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Lim consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he violated FINRA Rule 2010 by acting in contravention of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act in that he engaged in 32 instances of spoofing in US Treasury Securities. The findings stated that Lim entered a larger, fully displayed order on one side of the market, generally for $25 or $50 million, in 5- or 10-year notes with intent to cancel that order at the time he placed it. Simultaneously, Lim had a smaller order on the opposite side of the market in the same product with only a portion of the vale displayed. Other market participants would react to Lim’s larger, fully displayed order in a variety of ways including moving their resting order prices up or down, withdrawing any orders resting opposite the larger, fully displayed order, or placing aggressive orders to execute against orders resting opposite the larger, fully displayed order. In 15 of the 32 instances, Lim received executions on his smaller, iceberg orders while his larger, fully displayed orders were in the market. In each of the 32 instances, because Lim intended to cancel each larger, fully displayed order at the time he placed it, these orders falsely signaled a shift in buy or sell interest through their impact on the stack.

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Matthew Higgins in Firm Barclays Capital Inc.

February 23, 2025 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are currently investigating claims that Broker Matthew Higgins (Higgins) has been accused by investors of engaging in fraudulent misappropriation of their funds. According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), it appears that Higgins was employed by Barclays Capital Inc. at the time of the activity. If you have been a victim of Higgins’s alleged misconduct our firm may be able to assist you in recovering funds.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on December 03, 2024.

Without admitting or denying the findings, Higgins consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he participated in private securities transactions without providing prior written notice to his member firm. The findings stated that Higgins participated in private securities transactions by soliciting two investors to invest a total of $150,000 in partnership interests issued by a crypto asset investment fund he co-founded. In addition, Higgins solicited one of those investors and an additional investor to invest $200,000 in promissory notes issued by a crypto asset mining company he co-founded. Higgins introduced the investment opportunities to the investors, answered their questions about the fund or company, sent the investors the offering documents, and facilitated the transactions. Higgins did not receive any commissions for soliciting these transactions or any compensation in connection with the investment fund or the crypto asset mining company. None of the investors were customers of the firm.