Securities Lawyers Blog
The investment lawyers at Gana Weinstein LLP have experience helping investors determine whether their portfolio losses at investment firms, such as UBS Financial Services Inc., 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.
UBS Financial Services Inc. is the main U.S. wealth management firm of UBS, providing advice-based investment, planning, and banking services to high net worth and ultra high net worth individuals and families. The firm operates through regional divisions covering the Northeast, Southeast, West, and Central United States, an international division, and a remote Wealth Advice Center that serves more than 200,000 clients.
UBS Financial Services Inc. – By the Numbers:
- CRD #: 8174
- Regulatory Events: 476
- Arbitration Events: 445
- Broker Employees: 10,227
UBS Financial Services Inc. – Investment Advisors:
- SEC #: 7163
- Assets Under Management: $915,793,138,114
- ADV Form Employee: 12,524
UBS Financial Services Inc. – In the News:
FINRA v. UBS Financial Services Inc. (Case #2021069426901) – From January 2019 through June 2023, UBS Financial failed to establish and implement policies and procedures for its AML compliance program that could be reasonably expected to detect and cause the reporting of suspicious transactions involving foreign currency wires. As a result, the firm failed to reasonably monitor and investigate foreign currency wires involving, among other issues, high-risk geographic locations, unusually large dollar amounts, and no apparent business purpose. Additionally, between January 2019 and December 2022, UBS Financial failed to reasonably implement its customer due diligence program with respect to certain customers. The firm also failed to timely detect and report suspicious transactions involving money movements by these same customers. As a result, UBS Financial violated FINRA Rules 3310(a), 3310(f), and 2010, and is censured, fined $20 million, and required to take corrective action.
FINRA v. UBS Financial Services Inc. (Case #2019061777501) – From December 2012 through September 2018, UBS FSI submitted approximately 17,000 blue sheets to FINRA that inaccurately reported one or more of eight types of transaction information. Collectively, the firm failed to include required transactions or transaction information, or included incorrect information, for approximately 4.4 million transactions. Therefore, UBS FSI violated FINRA Rules 8211, 8213, and 2010.
FINRA v. UBS Financial Services Inc. (Case #2022076156301) – From February 2014 through November 2024, UBS FSI sent its customers over 330 million trade confirmations that either (1) disclosed that the price shown was or may be an average price when it was not an average price or (2) failed to disclose that the price shown was in fact an average price. These failures occurred even though FINRA notified UBS FSI about its inaccurate average price disclosures in February 2014. As a result, UBS FSI violated Rule 10b-10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and FINRA Rules 2232 and 2010. From at least February 2014 through August 2024, UBS FSI also failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system, including written supervisory procedures (WSPs), reasonably designed to achieve compliance with Exchange Act Rule 10b-10 and FINRA Rule 2232. After FINRA notified UBS FSI about its inaccurate average price disclosures in February 2014, UBS FSI did not take reasonable or timely steps to ensure its trade confirmations correctly included or omitted average price disclosures. Additionally, until August 2024, UBS FSI had no supervisory review to determine whether confirmations correctly included or omitted average price disclosures. Accordingly, UBS FSI violated FINRA Rules 3110 and 2010, and NASD Rule 3010.
FINRA v. UBS Financial Services Inc. (Case #2019061442601) – From January 2017 to at least December 2018, UBS-FS failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system, including written procedures, reasonably designed to assess whether its registered representatives recommended to retail customers short-term trades of syndicate preferred stocks that were unsuitable. At least 22 UBS-FS representatives or representative teams recommended that UBS-FS’s retail customers purchase syndicate preferred stocks and then sell the positions within 180 days, causing the customers to sustain losses on these transactions while the representatives collected concessions and commissions. Based on the above conduct, UBS-FS violated FINRA Rules 3110 and 2010.
FINRA v. UBS Financial Services Inc. (Case #2021073037102) – This matter originated from a regulatory tip made to FINRA.
Gana Weinstein LLP has successfully handled hundreds of customer investment disputes with their brokerage firms. Our attorneys can help you detect and uncover suspicious activity in your accounts. Our consultations are free and we welcome all inquiries.