mikednolan

[mikednolan]

Investor Recovery – Shopoff Land Fund Subject to Regulatory Securities Fraud Complaint

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP have represented investors who were sold private placement investments in real estate ventures issued by Shopoff Securities.  The Shopoff Land deals are highly risky and often times unsuitable for investors. Our attorneys can analyze your accounts and determine if you have a potential claim.

Recently, The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought a case against Shopoff Securities, Inc., William Shopoff, and Stephen Shopoff. From about December 2010 through March 2017 FINRA alleged Shopoff Securities fraudulently sold approximately $12.57 million of promissory note investments to 29 investors.  FINRA claimed that Shopoff Securities failed to disclose that $165,000 investment proceeds would actually be transferred to William Shopoff and his personal trust to pay his and his wife’s personal expenses.  FINRA also claimed that Shopoff also failed to disclose that some investment proceeds would be used to repay previous note investors.

In addition, FINRA alleged that from at least August 2014 through August 2016 Shopoff Securities and William Shopoff fraudulently sold two private placement offerings by massively inflating his and his wife’s cash assets in a financial statement given to a third-party due diligence provider assessing the Shopoffs’ financial wherewithal. During this time William Shopoff made material misrepresentations and omissions about his and Shopoffs financial condition in connection with sales of Shopoff Land Fund III and Shopoff Land Fund IV.  FINRA claims that in March 2014, William Shopoff caused the transfer of a temporary $1.5 million to William Shopoff’s personal bank account from the account of an affiliate of Shopoff Realty in order to artificially and falsely inflate the appearance of his liquid net worth.  FINRA claims that William Shopoff then directed Shopoff Realty to provide an accounting firm with the artificially inflated cash amount in William Shopoff’s personal bank.

FINRA claimed that this information was material to investors because reports generated in 2015 stated that Shopoff Realty was dependent upon the continued financial support of the Shopoff Revocable Trust and William and Shopoff if sufficient funds were not generated through Shopoff Realty’s operational activities.

Shopoff’s offerings include:

Shopoff Land Fund I LP

Shopoff Land Fund II, L.P.

Shopoff Land Fund III, L.P.

Shopoff Land Fund IV, L.P.

Shopoff Land Fund V, L.P.

Shopoff California Commercial Fund, L.P.

Shopoff Commercial Growth and Income Fund III, L.P.

SCGIF II – Skypointe, LLC

SCF – 4440 VKA, LLC

SCGIF II – Franklin, LLC

SCF – 2100 Q Street, LLC

SCGIF II – Des Plaines, LLC

Vertimass, LLC

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/investor-recovery-shopoff-land-fund-subject-to-regulatory-securities-fraud-complaint/

[mikednolan]

Broker Ronald Rothchild Has Multiple Customer Investment Complaints

According to BrokerCheck records financial advisor Ronald Rothchild (Rothchild), currently employed by National Securities Corporation (National Securities) has been subject to at least four customer complaint, two financial disclosures, and an employment termination for cause.  According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), most of Rothchild’s customer complaints allege that Rothchild made was negligent, breached his fiduciary duty, made unsuitable investments, and made misrepresentations.

In July 2018 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Rothchild violated the securities laws including negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and unsuitable investments causing $100,000 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

In March 2018 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Rothchild violated the securities laws including that investments were misrepresented to her and were unsuitable based on her investment objectives and risk tolerance which were also incorrectly stated on new account paperwork.  The claim is currently settled.

In December 2016 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Rothchild violated the securities laws including negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and misrepresentations causing $170,000 in damages.  The claim is settled for $48,000.

Brokers are required under the securities laws to treat their clients fairly.  This obligation includes the duties to disclose material risks of the investments they recommend and to present products, particularly complex or confusing products, in a fair and balanced manner that allows the client to evaluate the recommendation.  Another important obligation advisors have is to make only suitable recommendations for investments to the client.  There are many investments that are not appropriate for the majority of investors or for certain investors given their risk tolerance, age, and other factors.  Advisors should not present these investment options to clients.  There are two screens that advisors must employ to determine whether an investment is suitable for a client.  First, there must be a reasonable basis for the recommendation – meaning that the product has been investigated and due diligence conducted into the investment’s features, benefits, risks, and other relevant factors.  The advisor must conclude that the investment is suitable for at least some investors and some securities may be suitable for no one.  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.

According to newsources, a study revealed that 7.3% of financial advisors had a customer complaint on their record when records from 2005 to 2015 were examined.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their BrokerCheck reports that include customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, terminations, and criminal cases.  In addition, research has show a disturbing pattern with troublesome brokers where brokers with high numbers of customer complaints are not kicked out of the industry but instead these brokers are sifted to lower quality brokerage firms with loose hiring practices and higher rates of customer complaints.  These lower quality firms may average brokers with five times as many complaints as the industry average.

Rothchild entered the securities industry in 2002.  From June 2011 until April 2016 Rothchild was associated with Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.  Since August 2017 Rothchild has been associated with National Securities out of the firm’s Melville, New York office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/broker-ronald-rothchild-has-multiple-customer-investment-complaints/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Alan Dole Subject to Complaints Over Alternative Investments

Advisor Alan Dole (Dole), currently employed by Cambridge Investment Research, Inc. (Cambridge) has been subject to at least two customer complaints.  According to a BrokerCheck report some of the customer complaints concern alternative investments and direct participation products (DPPs) such as non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and equipment leasing programs.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have extensive experience handling investor losses caused by these types of products.

In December 2018 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Dole violated the securities laws including the Virginia Securities Act, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, negligent supervision, breach of contract and violation of FINRA rules by recommending oil & gas and insurance related investments causing $348,366 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

In December 2018 another customer filed a complaint alleging that Dole violated the securities laws including the Virginia Securities Act, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, negligent supervision, breach of contract and violation of FINRA rules by recommending oil & gas and insurance related investments causing $497,691 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

Our firm often handles cases involving direct participation products, Non-Traded REITs, oil and gas offerings, equipment leasing products, and other alternative investments.  These products are almost always unsuitable for investors.  In addition, the brokers who sell them are paid additional commission in order to hype inferior quality investments which provides a perverse incentives by brokers to create an artificial market for products that no honest advisor would sell.

According to studies, non-traded REITs have historically have underperformed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds – meaning that non-traded REITs provide paltry investment returns considering the risk an investor takes.  Alternative investment products like oil and gas partnerships, REITs, and equipment leasing programs are rarely, if ever, appropriate for investors due to their high costs, illiquidity, high risks, and huge redemption charges of the products, if they can be redeemed at all.  Investors often fail to understand that they have lost money until many years after agreeing to the investment.

Unfortunately, due to the high commissions brokers earn on these products they sell them to investors who cannot profit from them.  These products have become so popular among brokers without providing any benefit to investors that many states now limit investors from investing more than 10% of their liquid assets in Non-Traded REITs.  Many states impose these limitations because its understood that that they provide virtually no benefit to investors in relationship to their risks.

Dole entered the securities industry in 2005.  Since November 2011 Dole has been registered with Cambridge Investment out of the firm’s Henrico, Virginia office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-alan-dole-subject-to-complaints-over-alternative-investments/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Christopher Bennett Alleged to Have Recommended Unsuitable Energy Securities

According to BrokerCheck records financial advisor Christopher Bennett (Bennett), formerly employed by J.J.B. Hilliard, W.L. Lyons, LLC (JJB Hilliard), has been subject to at least thirteen customer complaints and one regulatory action during the course of his career.  According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Bennett has been accused by multiple customers of unsuitable investment advice concerning various investment products including energy stocks most likely including master limited partnerships (MLPs).  The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP continue to report on investor related losses and potential legal remedies due to recommendations to investor in oil and gas and commodities related investments.

In February 2019 Bennett was sanctioned by FINRA after the regulator made allegations that Bennett consented to the sanctions and findings that he exercised discretionary trading authority in the accounts of several customers without written authorization from the customers and without obtaining his member firm’s prior written acceptance of the accounts as discretionary.

In February 2019 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Bennett violated the securities laws including the Securities Act of Kentucky, breach of fiduciary duty, and unsuitable investment recommendations causing $139,214 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

Our firm handles claims and is also investigating securities claims against brokerage firms over sales practices related to the recommendations of oil & gas and commodities products such as exchange traded notes (ETNs), structured notes, private placements, master limited partnerships (MLPs), leveraged ETFs, mutual funds, and individual stocks.

Before recommending investments in oil and gas and commodities related investments, brokers and advisors must ensure that the investment is appropriate for the investor and conduct due diligence on the company in order to understand the risks and prospects of the company.  Oil and gas and commodities related investments have been recommended by brokers under the assumption that commodities prices would continue to go up.  However, brokers who sell oil and gas and commodities products are obligated to understand the risks of these investments and convey them to clients.

The number of complaints against Bennett is unusual compared to his peers.  According to newsources, only about 7.3% of financial advisors have any type of disclosure event on their records among brokers employed from 2005 to 2015.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their CRD customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, and even criminal matters.  However, studies have found that there are fraud hotspots such as certain parts of California, New York or Florida, where the rates of disclosure can reach 18% or higher.  Moreover, according to the New York Times, BrokerCheck may be becoming increasing inaccurate and understate broker misconduct as studies have shown that 96.9% of broker requests to clean their records of complaints are granted.

Bennett entered the securities industry in 1995.  From 1995 until October 2018 Bennett was associated with JJB Hilliard out of the firm’s Louisville, Kentucky office location.

At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to inappropriate investments in oil and gas related securities.  Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-christopher-bennett-alleged-to-have-recommended-unsuitable-energy-securities/

[mikednolan]

Broker Philip Sparacino Subject to Churning Complaint

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Philip Sparacino (Sparacino) has been subject to at least two customer complaints, three debt liens or judgements, and one criminal matter during his career.  Sparacino is currently employed by First Standard Financial Company LLC (First Standard Financial) but has worked for a total of six firms during his 11 year career.  One of the customer complaints against Sparacino concern allegations of high frequency trading activity also referred to as churning and unsuitable investments.

In December 2018 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Sparacino violated the securities laws including churning and unsuitable trading causing $90,198 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

In September 2016 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Sparacino violated the securities laws including unsuitable trading, breach of fiduciary duty, and unauthorized trading causing $38,084 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

Sparacino also has three debts including a $3,774 lien from March 2017.  The fact that a broker cannot manage his own personal finances is material information for a client to consider.  In addition, the types of products clients have alleged were unsuitable are high commission products that may be recommended to generate high profits for the advisor at the expense of the client.

When brokers engage in excessive trading, sometimes referred to as churning, the broker will typical trade in and out of securities, sometimes even the same stock, many times over a short period of time.  Often times the account will completely “turnover” every month with different securities.  This type of investment trading activity in the client’s account serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is engaged in only to profit the broker through the generation of commissions created by the trades.  Churning is considered a species of securities fraud.  The elements of the claim 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.  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.

According to newsources, a study revealed that 7.3% of financial advisors had a customer complaint on their record when records from 2005 to 2015 were examined.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their BrokerCheck reports that include customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, terminations, and criminal cases.  In addition, research has show a disturbing pattern with troublesome brokers where brokers with high numbers of customer complaints are not kicked out of the industry but instead these brokers are sifted to lower quality brokerage firms with loose hiring practices and higher rates of customer complaints.  These lower quality firms may average brokers with five times as many complaints as the industry average.

Sparacino entered the securities industry in 2007.  From June 2012 until June 2014 Sparacino was registered with Alexander Capital, L.P.  Since July 2014 Sparacino has been registered with First Standard Financial out of the firm’s Red Bank, New Jersey office location.

At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to excessive trading and churning violations.  Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/broker-philip-sparacino-subject-to-churning-complaint/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Yousuf (Joe) Saljooki Subject to Multiple Churning Complaints

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Yousuf (Joe) Saljooki (Saljooki) has been subject to at least seven customer complaints, two regulatory actions, two employment terminations for cause, and one debt lien or judgement during his career.  Saljooki is formerly employed by Worden Capital Management LLC (Worden Capital) but has worked for a total of nine firms during his 12 year career.  The customer complaints against Saljooki concern allegations of high frequency trading activity also referred to as churning and unsuitable investments.

In July 2018 FINRA suspended Saljooki after he failed to respond to the regulator’s requests for information.

In April 2018 Saljooki was discharged from Worden Capital for failing to disclose and outstanding tax lien to the State of Arkansas during the application process for registration with the state.

In February 2018 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Saljooki violated the securities laws by engaging in churning, unsuitable investments, and fraud.  The claim alleged $523,930 in damages.  The claim settled for $50,000.

In December 2017 SW Financial discharged Saljooki after the firm alleged that Saljooki opened a branch office under another name without the permission of the firm in violation of FINRA Rule 3270.  The firm also accused him of violating Reg S-P by obtaining client information.

When brokers engage in excessive trading, sometimes referred to as churning, the broker will typical trade in and out of securities, sometimes even the same stock, many times over a short period of time.  Often times the account will completely “turnover” every month with different securities.  This type of investment trading activity in the client’s account serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is engaged in only to profit the broker through the generation of commissions created by the trades.  Churning is considered a species of securities fraud.  The elements of the claim 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.  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.

According to newsources, a study revealed that 7.3% of financial advisors had a customer complaint on their record when records from 2005 to 2015 were examined.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their BrokerCheck reports that include customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, terminations, and criminal cases.  In addition, research has show a disturbing pattern with troublesome brokers where brokers with high numbers of customer complaints are not kicked out of the industry but instead these brokers are sifted to lower quality brokerage firms with loose hiring practices and higher rates of customer complaints.  These lower quality firms may average brokers with five times as many complaints as the industry average.

Saljooki entered the securities industry in 2006.  From August 2015 until December 2017 Saljooki was registered with SW Financial.  From December 2017 until April 2018 Saljooki was registered with Worden Capital out of the firm’s Melville, New York office location.

At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to excessive trading and churning violations.  Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-yousuf-joe-saljooki-subject-to-multiple-churning-complaints/

[mikednolan]

UBS Broker Leonard Boccia Subject to Churning Complaint

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Leonard Boccia (Boccia) has been subject to at least three customer complaints during his career.  Boccia is currently employed by UBS Financial Services Inc. (UBS).  One of the customer complaints against Boccia concern allegations of high frequency trading activity also referred to as churning and unsuitable investments.

In December 2018 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Boccia violated the securities laws including that from 2016 to 2018 Boccia traded their accounts excessively and unsuitably, exercised discretion in their accounts without proper authority, and charged commissions that were not disclosed and/or misrepresented to them causing $1,000,000 in damages.  The claim is currently pending.

When brokers engage in excessive trading, sometimes referred to as churning, the broker will typical trade in and out of securities, sometimes even the same stock, many times over a short period of time.  Often times the account will completely “turnover” every month with different securities.  This type of investment trading activity in the client’s account serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is engaged in only to profit the broker through the generation of commissions created by the trades.  Churning is considered a species of securities fraud.  The elements of the claim 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.  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.

According to newsources, a study revealed that 7.3% of financial advisors had a customer complaint on their record when records from 2005 to 2015 were examined.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their BrokerCheck reports that include customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, terminations, and criminal cases.  In addition, research has show a disturbing pattern with troublesome brokers where brokers with high numbers of customer complaints are not kicked out of the industry but instead these brokers are sifted to lower quality brokerage firms with loose hiring practices and higher rates of customer complaints.  These lower quality firms may average brokers with five times as many complaints as the industry average.

Boccia entered the securities industry in 1990.  From November 2005 until March 2016 Boccia was registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC.  Since March 2016 Boccia has been registered with UBS out of the firm’s New York, New York office location.

At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to excessive trading and churning violations.  Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/ubs-broker-leonard-boccia-subject-to-churning-complaint/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Daniel Davila Subject to Complaint Over Alternative Investments

Advisor Daniel Davila (Davila), formerly employed by Purshe Kaplan Sterling Investments (Purshe Kaplan) and currently employed by advisory firm Austin Walth Management, LLC (Austin Wealth) has been subject to at least two customer complaints.  According to a BrokerCheck report some of the customer complaints concern alternative investments and direct participation products (DPPs) such as non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and equipment leasing programs.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have extensive experience handling investor losses caused by these types of products.

In October 2017 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Davila violated the securities laws by recommending non-traded REIT and private placement investments that were unsuitable in 2010 through 2011.  The claim alleged $1 million in damages and settled for $670,000

Our firm often handles cases involving direct participation products, Non-Traded REITs, oil and gas offerings, equipment leasing products, and other alternative investments.  These products are almost always unsuitable for investors.  In addition, the brokers who sell them are paid additional commission in order to hype inferior quality investments which provides a perverse incentives by brokers to create an artificial market for products that no honest advisor would sell.

According to studies, non-traded REITs have historically have underperformed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds – meaning that non-traded REITs provide paltry investment returns considering the risk an investor takes.  Alternative investment products like oil and gas partnerships, REITs, and equipment leasing programs are rarely, if ever, appropriate for investors due to their high costs, illiquidity, high risks, and huge redemption charges of the products, if they can be redeemed at all.  Investors often fail to understand that they have lost money until many years after agreeing to the investment.

Unfortunately, due to the high commissions brokers earn on these products they sell them to investors who cannot profit from them.  These products have become so popular among brokers without providing any benefit to investors that many states now limit investors from investing more than 10% of their liquid assets in Non-Traded REITs.  Many states impose these limitations because its understood that that they provide virtually no benefit to investors in relationship to their risks.

Davila entered the securities industry in 1987.  From October 2009 until October 2014 Davila was associated with Triad Advisors, Inc.  From October 2014 until February 2019 Davila was registered with Purshe Kaplan out of the firm’s Austin, Texas office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-daniel-davila-subject-to-complaint-over-alternative-investments/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Mitchell Bloom Barred By Regulator Over Unapproved Product Sales

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) advisor Mitchell Bloom (Bloom), formerly associated with Cetera Advisor Networks LLC (Cetera), and operating under the d/b/a name Bloom Financial, LLC was terminated by Cetera in November 2017.  Bloom was accused by Cetera of violating firm’s policies and the representative participated in a private securities transaction and engaged in an outside business activity without the firm’s prior approval.

Thereafter in February 2019 FINRA barred Bloom from the securities industry.  FINRA alleged that Bloom consented to the sanction and to the findings that he refused to appear for FINRA on-the-record testimony in connection with its investigation of the reasons for the termination of his employment from Cetera.  FINRA found that Cetera had filed a Form U5 stating that in violation of the firm’s policies he participated in a private securities transaction and engaged in an outside business activity without the firm’s prior approval.  Bloom’s failure to respond to FINRA drew an automatic bar from the industry.

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”.  At this point is unclear what securities or business activities Bloom was engaged in.  His public disclosures state that he was engaged in Bloom Life, LLC selling annuities and Alterna Card Services – a sales and marketing company.

In the industry the term selling away refers to when a financial advisor solicits investments in companies, promissory notes, or other securities that are not pre-approved by the broker’s affiliated firm.  However, even though when these incidents occur the brokerage firm claims ignorance of their advisor’s activities the firm is obligated under the FINRA rules to properly monitor and supervise its employees in order to detect and prevent brokers from offering investments in this fashion.  In order to properly supervise their brokers each firm is required to have procedures in order to monitor the activities of each advisor’s activities and interaction with the public.  Selling away misconduct often occurs where brokerage firms either fail to put in place a reasonable supervisory system or fail to actually implement that system.  Supervisory failures allow brokers to engage in unsupervised misconduct that can include all manner improper conduct including selling away.

In cases of selling away the investor is unaware that the advisor’s investments are improper.  In many of these cases the investor will not learn that the broker’s activities were wrongful until after the investment scheme is publicized, the broker is fired or charged by law enforcement, or stops returning client calls altogether.

Bloom entered the securities industry in 1987.  From February 2011 until November 2017 Bloom was associated with Cetera out of the firm’s Westminster, Colorado office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation. Investors may be able recover their losses through securities arbitration.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are experienced in representing investors in cases of selling away and brokerage firms failure to supervise their representatives.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-mitchell-bloom-barred-by-regulator-over-unapproved-product-sales/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Raymond Menna Has Multiple Public Disclosures Including Regulatory Action

According to BrokerCheck records financial advisor Raymond Menna (Menna), currently employed by Planmember Securities Corporation (Planmember Securities) has been subject to at least two customer complaints and one regulatory complaint.  According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), most of Menna’s customer complaints allege that Carver made unsuitable recommendations.

In August 2018 FINRA brought a complaint against Menna who consented to sanctions and to findings that he improperly shared in the losses of a customer. FINRA found that the value of the account of one of Menna’s customers declined to zero as a result of customer withdrawals and trading losses and Menna agreed to give the customer money on a monthly basis. Thereafter, FINRA found that Menna made monthly cash payments to the customer totalling approximately $15,000.  FINRA found that Menna did not obtain prior written authorization from his member firm or the customer to make such payments.

Brokers are required under the securities laws to treat their clients fairly.  This obligation includes the duties to disclose material risks of the investments they recommend and to present products, particularly complex or confusing products, in a fair and balanced manner that allows the client to evaluate the recommendation.  Another important obligation advisors have is to make only suitable recommendations for investments to the client.  There are many investments that are not appropriate for the majority of investors or for certain investors given their risk tolerance, age, and other factors.  Advisors should not present these investment options to clients.  There are two screens that advisors must employ to determine whether an investment is suitable for a client.  First, there must be a reasonable basis for the recommendation – meaning that the product has been investigated and due diligence conducted into the investment’s features, benefits, risks, and other relevant factors.  The advisor must conclude that the investment is suitable for at least some investors and some securities may be suitable for no one.  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.

According to newsources, a study revealed that 7.3% of financial advisors had a customer complaint on their record when records from 2005 to 2015 were examined.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their BrokerCheck reports that include customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, terminations, and criminal cases.  In addition, research has show a disturbing pattern with troublesome brokers where brokers with high numbers of customer complaints are not kicked out of the industry but instead these brokers are sifted to lower quality brokerage firms with loose hiring practices and higher rates of customer complaints.  These lower quality firms may average brokers with five times as many complaints as the industry average.

Menna entered the securities industry in 1989.  Since August 2010 Menna has been associated with Planmember Securities out of the firm’s Farmingville, New York office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-raymond-menna-has-multiple-public-disclosures-including-regulatory-action/

[mikednolan]

Advisor Dean Grant Arrested On Charges of Defrauding His Investment Clients

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) advisor Dean Grant (Grant), formerly associated with M Holdings Securities, Inc. (M Holdings), and operating under the d/b/a name Dean Grant Financial and GFG Strategic Advisors was arrested in February 2019 on charges of fraud.  Grant’s company purportedly offers financial and estate planning, life insurance, retirement planning, charitable giving, disability and long-term care.  In addition, Grant has three tax liens totaling approximately $150,000.

Grant purportedly turned himself in after an investigation by the Georgia Insurance Commissioner’s Office showed he used nearly $600,000 from at least three clients for his personal gain.  Yet, Grant apparently did not obtain any insurance investments with the money.  Grant was charged with three counts of insurance fraud, three counts of theft by taking, one count of forgery and two counts of trafficking of an elder person. Authorities claim that clients made checks made out to Dean Grant Financial and then he made checks made out to Dean Grant himself taking the money.

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”.

In the industry the term selling away refers to when a financial advisor solicits investments in companies, promissory notes, or other securities that are not pre-approved by the broker’s affiliated firm.  However, even though when these incidents occur the brokerage firm claims ignorance of their advisor’s activities the firm is obligated under the FINRA rules to properly monitor and supervise its employees in order to detect and prevent brokers from offering investments in this fashion.  In order to properly supervise their brokers each firm is required to have procedures in order to monitor the activities of each advisor’s activities and interaction with the public.  Selling away misconduct often occurs where brokerage firms either fail to put in place a reasonable supervisory system or fail to actually implement that system.  Supervisory failures allow brokers to engage in unsupervised misconduct that can include all manner improper conduct including selling away.

In cases of selling away the investor is unaware that the advisor’s investments are improper.  In many of these cases the investor will not learn that the broker’s activities were wrongful until after the investment scheme is publicized, the broker is fired or charged by law enforcement, or stops returning client calls altogether.

Grant entered the securities industry in 1992.  From August 1992 until October 2013 Grant was associated with NYLife Securities LLC.  From September 2014 until January 2019 Grant was associated with M Holdings out of the firm’s Milledeville, Georgia office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation. Investors may be able recover their losses through securities arbitration.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are experienced in representing investors in cases of selling away and brokerage firms failure to supervise their representatives.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/advisor-dean-grant-arrested-on-charges-of-defrauding-his-investment-clients/

[mikednolan]

Investor Bulletin: Social Sentiment Investing Tools —Think Twice Before Trading Based on Social Media

The SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) are issuing this Investor Bulletin to inform investors about social sentiment investing tools and highlight their risks. This Bulletin provides tips to consider before using tools that analyze or aggregate information from social media sources to make investment decisions or attempt to predict changes in the stock market’s direction or in the price of a security. from Securities Fraud https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_sentimentinvesting

[mikednolan]

Former Advisor Kristian Gaudet Criminally Charged For Stealing Client Funds

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) former advisor Kristian Gaudet (Gaudet), formerly associated with Ameritas Investment Corp. (Ameritas) in Cut Off, Louisiana has been terminated by the firm for using client funds for personal use.  Thereafter, in January 2019, Gaudet consented to the sanction and findings that he refused to appear for and provide FINRA on-the-record testimony concerning the internal investigation by Ameritas that Gaudet was found to have utilized client funds for personal use. Accordingly, Gaudet was barred by FINRA from the securities industry.

According to newsources, Gaudet arrested for stealing nearly $1 million from his clients.  Gaudet was a former vice president of the Greater Lafourche Port Commission and owner of Kris Gaudet Insurance and Financial Services.  Authorities received a complaint form a couple that found issues with a $350,000 investment made to “Winston Financial” in 2012.  Authorities claim that the money was used for purposes other than the investment purposes for which it was intended.  Authorities also accused Gaudet of using funds received in May from another couple to buy a home in Larose.  Gaudet has been accused of frequently using money he received from investors for personal gain including using money clients paid for insurance to buy real estate.

At this time it is unclear the nature or scope of the alleged outside business activities (OBAs) and private securities transactions. Often accompanied with either disclosed or undisclosed OBAs is the risk of the sale of unapproved investment products – a practice known in the industry as “selling away” – a serious violation of the securities laws.  In the industry the term selling away refers to when a financial advisor solicits investments in companies, promissory notes, or other securities that are not pre-approved by the broker’s affiliated firm.  Sometimes those investments have some legitimacy but often times these types of investments can end up being Ponzi schemes or the advisor can be engaging in the conversion of funds.  When advisors convert or misappropriate funds they often created businesses or other vehicles to serve as a cover for the theft of funds.

The securities laws and the FINRA rules require firms to monitor and supervise its employees in order to detect and prevent brokers from offering investments in this fashion.  In order to properly supervise their brokers each firm is required to have procedures in order to monitor the activities of each advisor’s activities and interaction with the public.  Selling away misconduct often occurs where brokerage firms either fail to put in place a reasonable supervisory system or fail to actually implement that system.  Supervisory failures allow brokers to engage in unsupervised misconduct that can include all manner improper conduct including selling away.

In cases of selling away the investor is unaware that the advisor’s investments are improper.  In many of these cases the investor will not learn that the broker’s activities were wrongful until after the investment scheme is publicized, the broker is fired or charged by law enforcement, or stops returning client calls altogether.

Gaudet entered the securities industry in 2000.  From October 2003 until December 2018 Gaudet was registered with Ameritas out of the firm’s Cut Off, Louisiana office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation. Investors may be able recover their losses through securities arbitration.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are experienced in representing investors in cases of selling away and brokerage firms failure to supervise their representatives.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/former-advisor-kristian-gaudet-criminally-charged-for-stealing-client-funds/

[mikednolan]

Is GBP Capital A Ponzi Scheme? – FBI Now Investigating Firm

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP continue to report and update investors on their investigation into GPB Capital Holdings (GPB Capital).  The firm currently represents multiple clients who have been recommended GPB Capital by brokers who were paid large commissions to sell the investment.

GPB Capital has been plagued with issues since last year when the firm stopped raising new money, lost an auditor, and engaged in a lawsuit with a former business partner Patrick Dibre (Dibre).  GPB Capital complained that Dibre reneged on the sale to GPB Capital of certain auto dealerships causing the fund to lose $40 million according to GPB’s complaint.  Dibre counterclaimed that GPB Capital is nothing more than “a very complicated and manipulative Ponzi scheme.”  Then it was reported that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. (FINRA) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) launched investigations in to GPB Capital.

Now, according to newsources, GBP Capital is being investigated by the FBI who made an unannounced visit to GPB Capital��s offices in early March 2019.  None of this information is good news for investors who relied upon the due diligence efforts of their brokers in agreeing to invest in GBP Capital offerings.

Brokerage firms are unfortunately all too willing to subject their clients to the risks of investing in GPB due to the hefty fees and commissions these firms earn.  When GPB Capital’s Automotive portfolio raised a total of $369.2 million from more than 3,800 investors it paid out $43.4 million, or 11.75%, in commissions.  7% of that amount goes directly to the recommending broker’s pocket.  There are as many as 60 brokerage firms that sold these funds and among the largest of those firms are Royal Alliance Associates Inc., Sagepoint Financial Inc., FSC Securities Corp. and Woodbury Financial Services Inc.

GPB Capital has raised $1.8 billion in investor money since 2013.  Subsequent reporting has alerted the public that investors should no longer rely on 2015 and 2016 financial statements and independent accounts’ reports for: GPB Automotive Portfolio, ($622.1 million); GPB Holdings II, ($645.8 million); and GPB Holdings Qualified.  GPB Capital missed an April 30 deadline to file financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) which crossed industry thresholds for making such information public more than a year ago.

It is highly unusual for an organization of the purported size of GPB Capital to stop raising money, obtain a new auditor, decrease distributions, and be under multiple regulatory investigations without serious underlining issues.  The fact that multiple auditor reports have been disclaimed, suggests potentially multiple years of false information or a size and nature that is currently unknown.

GPB Capital Holding’s funds include:

GPB Cold Storage

GPB Automotive Fund

GPB Automotive Income

GPB Holdings II and III

GPB Waste Management

GPB NY Development

Brokers have a responsibility treat investors fairly which includes obligations such as making only suitable investments for the client after conducting due diligence.  Due diligence includes an investigation into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, issuer, history, and other relevant factors.  Appropriate due diligence would identify that an alternative investment’s high costs, illiquidity, and conflicts of interests that would make the investment not suitable for investors.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/is-gbp-capital-a-ponzi-scheme-fbi-now-investigating-firm/

[mikednolan]

Gana Weinstein LLP Files Complaint on Behalf of Client Related to Laidlaw & Company’s Offering of 5G Investment

The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP recently filed a complaint on behalf of a client alleging that Laidlaw & Company (UK) Ltd. (Laidlaw) recommended the investor purchase a micro cap stock underwritten by the firm in violation of the securities laws.  According to newsources and public filings Laidlaw has been involved in the fraudulent promotion of numerous small and micro cap stocks to their clients in violation of their duties to their clients to disclose conflicts of interests.  These violations also include potentially facilitating pump-and-dump schemes.

Recently, one of Laidlaw’s clients, Barry Hoing (Hoing), was charged by The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for generating $27 million through a “classic pump-and-dump scheme.” The SEC’s allegations focus on stocks including BioZone Pharmaceuticals (now Cocrystal Pharma) (COCP), MGT Capital (OTC: MGTI), and MabVax Therapeutics (OTC: MBVX).   However, other public filings reveal Hoing was also involved in other stocks including Riot Blockchain (RIOT), PolarityTE (PTE formerly COOL), and Marathon Patent Group (MARA).  In addition, Laidlaw was involved in other securities offerings including Aethlon Medical, Actinium, Boston Therapeutics, 5G Investment, Alliaqua, Aspen Group, Brazahav Resources, Fusion Telecoms International, Protea Biosciences Group, Aeolus Pharmaceuticals, Medovex Corp, Relmada Therapeutics, Sevion Therapeutics, Spectrascience, and Spherix.

The investor in the filed complaint invested in 5G Investment and claims that the Laidlaw has manipulated 5G Investment and FTE Networks in order for the firm and its principals to profit at the investor’s expense.  In addition, the investor also alleged that his brokers Rob Rotunno (Rotunno) and Craig Bonn (Bonn) churned his account generating significant profits for the brokers and losses for the investor.  Then, the brokers allegedly recommended that the investor make a substantial investment in 5G Investment almost completely on margin.  Rotunno has already been subject to nine investor complaints – many of which involve private placement securities offered by Laidlaw.

According to public filings Laidlaw serves as the broker dealer for many of companies secondary Regulation D offering or Private Investment in a Public Company (PIPE) deals as part of the company’s scheme.  Laidlaw’s facilitation of trading through these deals is alleged to create liquidity in the market so preferred investors and the firm can dump stocks at their client’s expense.

Laidlaw referred to these conflicted offerings as “WPGAT Deals” which stands for “We are pretty good at this.”  Laidlaw’s owners formed a company called WPGAT which is listed as a managing director of PPLL Partners LLC.  This company purportedly stands for “Pump Pump Loose Loose.”

According to newsources, Laidlaw’s WPGAT group of brokers include Richard Michlski, Kevin Wilson, Brian Robertson, Michael Murray, Luke Kottke, Daniel Kuhar, Henry McCormack, Christopher Oppito, Rob Rotunno, Craig Bonn, and John Marinaccio.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation. Investors may be able recover their losses through securities arbitration.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are experienced in representing investors in pump and dump cases and brokerage firms’ failure to disclose conflicts of interests to their clients.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/gana-weinstein-llp-files-complaint-on-behalf-of-client-related-to-laidlaw-companys-offering-of-5g-investment/

[mikednolan]

Raymond James Advisor George Mathis Has Five Investment Complaints

According to BrokerCheck records financial advisor George Mathis (Mathis), currently employed by Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (Raymond James) has been subject to at least five customer complaints and one termination for cause.  According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), most of Mathis’ customer complaints allege that Mathis made unsuitable recommendations in a variety of securities.

In May 2018 a customer brought a complaint against Mathis alleging the broker violated the securities laws by breaching his fiduciary duty, negligence, and fraud from 2014 through September 2016.  The claim alleged $65,000 in damages and is pending.

In August 2016 a customer brought a complaint against Mathis alleging the broker violated the securities laws by breaching his fiduciary duty, negligence, and and violation of the FINRA Rules from September 2013 through January 2016.  The claim alleged $190,000 in damages and settled.

In August 2015 a customer brought a complaint against Mathis alleging the broker violated the securities laws by making misrepresentations.  The claim alleged $17,946 in damages and was closed.

Brokers are required under the securities laws to treat their clients fairly.  This obligation includes the duties to disclose material risks of the investments they recommend and to present products, particularly complex or confusing products, in a fair and balanced manner that allows the client to evaluate the recommendation.  Another important obligation advisors have is to make only suitable recommendations for investments to the client.  There are many investments that are not appropriate for the majority of investors or for certain investors given their risk tolerance, age, and other factors.  Advisors should not present these investment options to clients.  There are two screens that advisors must employ to determine whether an investment is suitable for a client.  First, there must be a reasonable basis for the recommendation – meaning that the product has been investigated and due diligence conducted into the investment’s features, benefits, risks, and other relevant factors.  The advisor must conclude that the investment is suitable for at least some investors and some securities may be suitable for no one.  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.

According to newsources, a study revealed that 7.3% of financial advisors had a customer complaint on their record when records from 2005 to 2015 were examined.  Brokers must publicly disclose reportable events on their BrokerCheck reports that include customer complaints, IRS tax liens, judgments, investigations, terminations, and criminal cases.  In addition, research has show a disturbing pattern with troublesome brokers where brokers with high numbers of customer complaints are not kicked out of the industry but instead these brokers are sifted to lower quality brokerage firms with loose hiring practices and higher rates of customer complaints.  These lower quality firms may average brokers with five times as many complaints as the industry average.

Mathis entered the securities industry in 2000.  From January 2008 until November 2011 Mathis was registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC.  Since November 2011 Mathis has been associated with Raymond James out of the firm’s The Villages, Florida office location.

Investors who have suffered losses are encouraged to contact us at (800) 810-4262 for consultation.  At Gana Weinstein LLP, our attorneys are experienced representing investors who have suffered securities losses due to the mishandling of their accounts.  Claims may be brought in securities arbitration before FINRA.  Our consultations are free of charge and the firm is only compensated if you recover.

from Securities Fraud https://www.securitieslawyersblog.com/raymond-james-advisor-george-mathis-has-five-investment-complaints/

[mikednolan]

Investor Bulletin: The Escheatment Process

The SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy is issuing this Investor Bulletin to provide basic information about the escheatment process for investment accounts. from Securities Fraud https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_escheatment