unsuitable investments

Broker Investigation: Brian Decker Churning Claims

May 5, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Brian Decker (Decker) has been the subject of at least 10 customer complaints and 2 judgments and liens over the course of his career. Customers have filed complaints against Decker alleging a litany of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, unauthorized trades, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentations and false statements, and churning, among other claims. The claims involve different investment recommendations including claims involving equity securities among other speculative securities.

Decker entered the securities industry in 2006 with brokerage firm J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. Thereafter, in January 2007 through June 2009, Decker was associated with brokerage firm vFinance Investments, Inc. Finally since September 2009, Decker has been registered with Legend Securities, Inc. in Trinton Falls, New Jersey.

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. When brokers engage in churning the investment trading activity in the client’s account serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is transacted to profit the broker through the generation of commission payments. The elements to establish a churning claim, which is considered a species of securities fraud, are excessive transactions of securities, broker control over the account, and intent to defraud the investor by obtaining unlawful commissions. A similar claim, excessive trading, under FINRA’s suitability rule involves just the first two elements.

Broker Investigation: Thomas Tedeschi’s Sales Practices

April 14, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Thomas Tedeschi (Tedeschi) has been the subject of at least 6 customer complaints, one judgment and lien over the course of his career. Customers have filed complaints against Tedeschi alleging a litany of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, unauthorized trades, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentations and false statements, and churning, among other claims. The claims involve different investment recommendations including claims involving warrants, penny stocks, and Exchange Traded Notes, among other speculative securities.

An examination of Tedeschi’s employment history reveals that Tedeschi moves from troubled firm to troubled firm. The pattern of brokers moving in this way is sometimes called “cockroaching” within the industry. See More Than 5,000 Stockbrokers From Expelled Firms Still Selling Securities, The Wall Street Journal, (Oct. 4, 2013). In Tedeschi’s 20 year career he has worked at 17 different firms.

Since 2008 alone Tedeschi has been registered with Westrock Advisors, Inc., Obsidian Financial Group, LLC, John Thomas Financial, Prestige Financial Center, Inc., Blackbook Capital LLC, and Aegis Capital Corp.

Broker Investigation: Salvatore Gioe’s Sales Practices

April 6, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Salvatore Gioe (Gioe) has been the subject of at least 11 customer complaints, one judgment and lien of over $197,000, and one regulatory action over the course of his career. Customers have filed complaints against Gioe alleging a litany of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, unauthorized trades, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentations and false statements, churning, margin fraud, among other claims. Many of the claims involve recommendations in penny stocks and other speculative securities.

Gioe was also suspended by the state of Arkansas for one year concerning allegation that in 2013, Gioe contacted an Arkansas resident through a cold call solicitation and recommended the purchase of Uni-Pixel, Inc. However, unfortunately for Gioe the cold caller turned out to be a securities examiner with the state of Arkansas. The examiner then sat and listed as Gioe allegedly told the examiner that he had information suggesting the price of Uni-Pixel would rise from its current price of $15.65 to about $25. The examiner asked Gioe if Uni-Pixel stock was a sure thing and Gioe allegedly responded saying that he did. However, according to Arkansas Uni-Pixel was a distressed company and this information was never disclosed to the examiner on the call.

An examination of Gioe’s employment history reveals that Gioe moves from troubled firm to troubled firm. The pattern of brokers moving in this way is sometimes called “cockroaching” within the industry. See More Than 5,000 Stockbrokers From Expelled Firms Still Selling Securities, The Wall Street Journal, (Oct. 4, 2013). In Gioe’s 14 year career he has worked at 13 different firms.

FINRA Sanctions Essex Securities for Failing to Supervise Mutual Fund Switching

December 4, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in an acceptance, waiver, and consent action (AWC), sanctioned brokerage firm Essex Securities, LLC (Essex Securities) alleging that from February 2010, through March 2011, Essex Securities through one of its brokers violated industry rules by engaging in a pattern of unsuitable mutual fund switching, a form of churning, in the accounts of seven customers. Further, FINRA found that Essex Securities violated FINRA’ supervisory rules by failing to establish and maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed to prevent unsuitable mutual fund switching.

Essex has been a FINRA member broker-dealer since 1998, is headquartered in Topsfield, MA, and conducts a general securities business with approximately 50 brokers out of 26 branch offices.

FINRA alleged that an Essex Securities broker engaged in a pattern of unsuitable mutual fund switching in seven customer accounts by not having reasonable grounds for believing that such transactions were suitable for those customers due to the frequency of the transactions and the transaction costs incurred. Part of the suitability rule requires brokers to take into consideration the cost consequences of the transactions and ensure that there is a reasonable basis for the incurring of such costs. In this case, FINRA found that on at least 29 occasions, the broker recommended that customers sell mutual funds within only one to thirteen months after purchasing them. Essex Securities was found to have earned commissions of approximately $60,000 on these switch transactions and broker himself was paid approximately $54,000.

Stifel Nicolaus Broker Robert Head Terminated and Barred for Unauthorized Trading

November 14, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) in an acceptance, waiver, and consent action (AWC) and barring former Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc. (Stifel Nicolaus) broker Robert Head (Head) concerning allegations that between August 2013, and October 2013, Head exercised discretion, aka unauthorized trading, in the account of a customer without obtaining the customer’s prior written consent in violation of NASD Conduct Rule 2510(b) and FINRA Rule 2010. In addition, FINRA alleged that Head recommended transactions to the same customer between January 2010, and October 2013, that were qualitatively and quantitatively unsuitable for the customer.

From August 2008, until January 2014, Head was registered with Stifel Nicolaus. Since that time, Head has not been registered with any brokerage firm. In December 2013, Head was discharged from Stifel Nicolaus for alleged violation of the firm’s policy regarding exercising discretion in a client’s account without written authorization.

According to FINRA, Head managed a Stifel Nicolaus trust account for a customer from August 2008, until October 2013. The customer was retired with an original account application listing investment objectives of “Growth and Income” and “Speculation / Active Trading / Complex Strategies.” FINRA found that in November 2009, the account’s investment objective was changed to identify only ”Speculation / Active Trading / Complex Strategies.” FINRA found that the customer never gave Head written authorization to exercise his own discretion for her account.

Gana LLP Investigates Investor Claims of Churning at Global Arena Capital and Whitewood Group

November 12, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law office of Gana Weinstein LLP is investigating a string of securities arbitration cases involving brokers associated or formerly associated with Global Arena Capital Corp (Global Arena) and Whitewood Group, Inc (Whitewood Group). Two such brokers include Mark Lisser (Lisser) and Benjamin Brown Jr. (Brown).

FINRA recently brought an action against Brown alleging that between October 19, 2012, and December 10, 2012, while registered with Whitewood Group, Brown effected 30 transactions while exercising discretion without written authorization in a customer’s account. From August 2011, until November 2011, Brown was associated with Global Arena. Thereafter, from February 2012, through May 2013, Brown was registered with Whitewood Group. Finally, from May 2013 until December 2013, Brown was associated with Salomon Whitney LLC. Brown has had two customer complaints filed against him, both alleged churning and unsuitable investments.

In FINRA’s action against Brown, it is against the industry’s rules for a registered representative to exercise any discretionary power in a customer’s account unless such customer has given prior written authorization and the account has been accepted by the member in writing. FINRA found that between October 19, 2012, and December 10, 2012, Brown effected 30 option transactions while exercising discretion in one customer’s account without the customer’s prior written authorization to exercise discretion to engage in discretionary trading.

Gana LLP Files Claim On Behalf of Customer Against Legend Securities for Churning and Unauthorized Trading

November 11, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Gana Weinstein LLP recently filed a claim against Legend Securities, Inc. (Legend) on behalf of a customer with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) alleging that Legend and Legend broker, Michael Guilfoyle, recommended unsuitable investments while churning his account and executing unauthorized trades in violation of FINRA rules and other applicable law.

In 2013, the customer received a cold call from Guilfoyle soliciting his business. Guilfoyle assured the client that he would only invest according to his investment objectives. In reliance upon Guilfoyle’s assurances, the client transferred his money to Legend. In early 2014, Guilfoyle and Legend also coaxed the client into investing his wife’s money, which she inherited from her parents. Soon after the client transferred the funds to Legend, Guilfoyle allegedly leveraged over concentrated the portfolio and began to churning the account. “Churning” is the Wall St. vernacular when there is unnecessarily high or excessive trading activity in an investor’s account, simply for the purpose of generating commissions for the broker. This is a violation of Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and FINRA rules.

More egregiously, Guilfoyle failed to contact the client concerning the trades being made in his account and acted without any prior authorization. Guilfoyle allegedly day-traded different stock positions earning fees for himself while providing no benefit to the client. For example, Guilfoyle concentrated the client’s account in speculative small cap stocks, such as Voxeljet AG (Voxeljet) that had only recently gone public. At the time, analysts warned that Voxeljet was a highly volatile stock, not suited for investors looking for long-term growth. Guilfoyle’s misconduct ultimately cost client nearly his and wife’s entire account value.

Broker Stephen Campbell Sanctioned Over Churning Claim

October 31, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Stephen Campbell (Campbell) concerning allegations that the broker engaged in churning in a client account. Campbell has been a broker since 1978. From November 12, 2004 through November 12, 2013, Campbell was registered with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. (Oppenheimer).

Investment churning is trading activity characterized by purchasing and selling activity that is excessive and serves no practical purpose for the investor. Brokers engage in churning solely to generate commissions without regard for the client’s interests. In order to establish a churning claim the investor must show that the trading was first excessive and second that the broker had control over the investment strategy. Certain commonly used measures and ratios used to determine churning help evaluate a churning claim. These ratios look at how frequently the account is turned over plus whether or not the expenses incurred in the account made it unreasonable that the investor could reasonably profit from the activity.

In Campbell’s case, FINRA found that one of his customers was a 55 year old single mother who initially opened an account with Campbell in 2000. FINRA alleged that from January 2009, through September 2011, while exercising control over her accounts, Campbell excessively and unsuitable traded her accounts inconsistently with her investment objectives, financial situation and needs. FINRA determined that the trading activity resulted in an annualized turnover ratio of 15 and an annualized cost-to-equity ratio of 59% in her IRA account, and an annualized turnover ratio of 21 and an annualized cost-to-equity ratio of 120% in her individual account. During this period, FINRA determined that Campbell’s improper trading resulted in a collective loss of approximately $62,000, while generating total gross commissions of approximately $64,000.

Regulator Finds that Center Street Securities Made Unsuitable Recommendations of GWG Renewable Secured Debentures Part II

October 29, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

This post continues our story on the allegations made by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Center Street Securities, Inc. (Center Street). As previously reported, FINRA sanctioned the firm concerning a multitude of rule violations in the sales of GWG Renewable Secured Debentures, an illiquid and high-risk private placement investment.

FINRA found that in order to purchase the GWG Debentures, Center Street customers were required to complete an account application, GWG subscription forms, and a “Compliance Alternative Investment (Non-Reg D) Suitability.” FINRA found that the compliance form required brokers to obtain information about customers’ existing assets, the concentration of the alternative investment as percentage of net worth, the customer’s age, and the customer’s investment objectives. Once completed, FINRA alleged that these documents were submitted to Center Street’s compliance department for supervisory and suitability review.

FINRA found that these forms were the only items the firm relied upon in reviewing and assessing Debenture sales. FINRA determined that Center Street had three employees of in their compliance department who conducted supervisory and suitability review of all transactions recommended to customers. FINRA alleged that the primary employee responsible for conducting the review of GWG Debenture received no training from the firm regarding the unique characteristics and risks of the GWG Debentures. The employee was also unaware of the firm’s guidelines concerning concentration of alternative products as well as state specific suitability requirements.

FINRA Sanctions Center Street Securities Over Sales of GWG Renewable Secured Debentures Part I

October 28, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned brokerage firm Center Street Securities, Inc. (Center Street) concerning allegations that: 1) between approximately March 2012, and August 2013 Center Street, through multiple brokers, made unsuitable recommendations to customers to purchase GWG Renewable Secured Debentures, an illiquid and high-risk private placement investment; 2) Center Street failed to maintain an adequate supervisory system and adequate written supervisory guidelines to reasonably supervise the sales of GWG debentures; 3) between approximately February 2012, and November 2012, Center Street also distributed an inaccurate GWG sales brochure to over 100 customers; and 4) certain Center Street customer account forms contained inaccurate information about customer net worth or other information, and thus the firm failed to maintain accurate books and records.

Center Street Securities is headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee, has been a FINRA member since 1991, has approximately 67 branch offices and approximately 84 registered representatives. This is not the first time that FINRA has brought regulatory action concerning the actions of Center Street representatives. See Center Street Securities Broker David Escarcega Investigated Over GWG Debenture Sales; FINRA Sanctions Michael Wurdinger and Anil Vazirani Over GWG Debenture Sales (FINRA sanctioned brokers associated with Center Street Securities, Inc.).

The notes are issued by GWG Holdings, Inc. (GWG) which purchases life insurance policies on the secondary market at a discount to the face value of the insurance policies. GWG pays the policy premiums until the insured dies and GWG then collects the insurance benefit making a profit, hopefully, by collecting more upon the maturity of the policies than the payment of the policy and servicing of the premiums. The Debentures have varying maturity terms and interest rates ranging from six-month at an annual interest rate 4.75% to seven years at 9.50%. The prospectus for GWG stated that the investments were speculative and involve a high degree of risk, including the possibility of risk of loss of the entire investment. An investment in the GWG Debentures, as a private placement, is illiquid and investors will not have access to their principal prior to maturity.