Securities Lawyers Blog
The investment lawyers at Gana Weinstein LLP have experience helping investors determine whether their portfolio losses at investment firms, such as Tradepro Securities, LLC., were caused by broker misconduct. There are many different ways that your broker can impermissibly drain your accounts. Our attorneys can help you understand the cause of your investment losses, uncover misconduct, and apply the law to hold accountable those responsible.
TradePro Securities is a broker-dealer registered with FINRA that has offered securities brokerage services. The firm was organized in Florida in 1999.
Tradepro Securities, LLC. – By the Numbers:
- CRD #: 103781
- Regulatory Events: 5
- Broker Employees: 10
Tradepro Securities, LLC. – In the News:
FINRA v. Tradepro Securities, LLC. (Case #2018059545203) – From July 23, 2015, through June 4, 2018, the Respondents failed to develop and implement an anti-money laundering (AML) program that was reasonably designed to achieve and monitor the firm’s compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the implementing regulations thereunder. In particular, the Respondents did not establish and implement policies and procedures tailored to the firm’s business, which could be reasonably expected to detect and cause the reporting of suspicious activity arising from wire transfers to customer accounts. Additionally, from July 23, 2015, through June 4, 2018, the Respondents failed to provide reasonable ongoing AML training to its associated persons. Also, from March 2016 to June 2018, the Respondents failed to conduct periodic reviews of account activity and enhanced due diligence with respect to a foreign financial institution (FFI) account, as required by the United States Department of the Treasury (Treasury) Regulation, 31 CFR §1010.610. As a result of the foregoing, Respondents violated FINRA Rules 3310(a), (b), and (e), and 2010. From July 2017 to June 2018, the Respondents failed to establish, maintain, and enforce a supervisory system, including written supervisory procedures, reasonably designed to prevent a terminated representative from continuing to access STS email, which contained customer records. During this period, Escobio was responsible for reviewing all emails sent from or received by a terminated, statutorily disqualified individual’s firm email address on a daily basis. Escobio failed to perform such reviews. Respondents also failed to recognize and investigate red flags indicating the terminated individual may have continued to access his firm email address containing customer records. As a result of the foregoing, STS violated Rule 30 of Regulation S-P and FINRA Rule 2010. Escobio caused STS to violate Rule 30 of Regulation S-P, and by virtue of the foregoing, Escobio violated FINRA Rule 2010. Further, Respondents’ email supervision failures violated FINRA Rules 3110 and 2010. From July 2015 to July 2017, on two occasions, Escobio, in the course of STS purchasing Rule 144A restricted securities, negligently misrepresented to corporate bond dealers, through written, signed certifications, that STS was a qualified institutional buyer (QIB), or was a dealer acting in a riskless-principal capacity on behalf of a QIB. These certifications were inaccurate since STS was not a QIB, and it purchased such restricted securities from the dealers on behalf of a non-QIB customer. As a result, Escobio violated FINRA Rule 2010.
Our attorneys have successfully represented hundreds of investors in investment disputes with their brokers and brokerage firms. Our consultations are free and we welcome all inquiries.