Securities Lawyers Blog

Anthony Gallea Has Complaints Over Complex Options Trading

October 5, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial advisor Anthony Gallea (Gallea) has at least four disclosable event. The four events are customer complaints alleging that Gallea engaged in some form of investment related misconduct in the handling of the client’s accounts. Gallea is currently employed by Morgan Stanley. Gallea’s customer complaints alleges that Gallea recommended unsuitable investments in a complex options trading strategy among other allegations and complaints.

In May 2022 a customer complained that Gallea violated the securities laws by alleging that Gallea unsuitability with respect to option trading strategy implemented in the account from 2018 through 2022. The claim is currently pending.

In April 2022 a customer complained that Gallea violated the securities laws by alleging that Gallea unsuitability with respect to option trading strategy implemented in the account from 2019 through 2021. The claim is currently pending.

An option is a contract that allows an investor to buy or sell an underlying security at a predetermined price over a certain period of time. Buying an option that allows you to buy shares at a later time is called a “call option,” and buying an option that allows you to sell shares at a later time is called a “put option.” Options are considered derivative securities because their price is derived from the value of the securities or other underlying instruments. The value change in options as they approach expiration is what is called time decay – meaning their value decays over time as expiration nears. Accordingly, an options trading strategy involving many options trades needs to be managed closely. Due to the risks of trading options FINRA has special rules and requirements related to their trading and to qualify investors for options trading.

Eduardo Da Cruz Has a Complaint Over Complex Options Trading

October 4, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial advisor Eduardo Da Cruz (Da Cruz) has at least one disclosable event. This event is a customer complaint alleging that Da Cruz engaged in some form of investment related misconduct in the handling of the client’s accounts. Da Cruz is currently employed by EFG Capital International (EFG). Da Cruz’s customer complaints alleges that Da Cruz recommended unsuitable investments in a complex options trading strategy among other allegations and complaints.

In November 2021 a customer complained that Da Cruz violated the securities laws by alleging that Da Cruz during the course of 2019 and 2020, EFG, failed to provide the expected and agreed upon level of service specifically with regards to complex option trading causing losses. The investor alleged damages of $4.1 million and the claim is currently pending.

An option is a contract that allows an investor to buy or sell an underlying security at a predetermined price over a certain period of time. Buying an option that allows you to buy shares at a later time is called a “call option,” and buying an option that allows you to sell shares at a later time is called a “put option.” Options are considered derivative securities because their price is derived from the value of the securities or other underlying instruments. The value change in options as they approach expiration is what is called time decay – meaning their value decays over time as expiration nears. Accordingly, an options trading strategy involving many options trades needs to be managed closely. Due to the risks of trading options FINRA has special rules and requirements related to their trading and to qualify investors for options trading.

James Pecoraro Sanctioned by Regulator Over Excessive Trading

October 4, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker James Pecoraro (Pecoraro), associated with Spartan Capital Securities, LLC (Spartan Capital) has been subject to at least 11 customer complaint, six regulatory actions, and one judgement or liens during his career. Some of the complaints against Pecoraro concern allegations of high frequency trading activity also referred to as churning or excessive trading among other securities laws violations.

In August 2022, FINRA found Pecoraro consented to sanctions and findings that he excessively traded in customers’ accounts. FINRA found that Pecoraro recommended a pattern of high-cost and high-velocity trading in the customers’ accounts. FINRA alleged that Pecoraro’s customers routinely followed his recommendations and exercised de facto control over their accounts. The findings state that Pecoraro effected a total of 325 trades resulting in annual turnover rates ranging from 13.47 to 57.97 and annualized cost-to-equity ratios ranging from 57.58 percent to 175.19 percent. FINRA found that Pecoraro’s trading was excessive and unsuitable for the customers’ investment profiles and the customers suffered losses of $166,018, total trading costs of $184,053, and commissions of $165,437.

Heath Goldstein Sold GWG Bonds and Investor Complaints

October 2, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

Advisor Heath Goldstein (Goldstein), currently employed by brokerage firm Western International Securities, Inc. (Western International) has been subject to at least 9 disclosures and customer complaints. According to a BrokerCheck report the customer complaints concern alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements. In Goldstein’s case at least three of the complaints occurred from the sale of GWG Holdings L-Bonds. GWG went into bankruptcy. The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP represented nearly 100 investors who suffered losses in GWG.

GWG’s business focused on the acquisition of life insurance policies in the secondary market. GWG was offered to investors even though the company had no significant operating history and no profits. Until 2018, GWG’s sole business was to borrow money to buy life insurance policies in the secondary market at prices that are less than the face value of the insurance benefits payable upon the death of the insureds. GWG would then hold the policies until maturity and collect the face value upon the insured’s death.

The contours of the GWG bonds are as follows:

Brokers Earned up to 8% commissions. From GWG’s prospectus “The total amount of the selling commissions…in the course of offering and selling L Bonds will not exceed 8.00% of the aggregate gross offering proceeds….” GWG Prospectus (Sept. 5, 2019).
GWG bonds are inadequately secured. While GWG claims that the L Bonds are secured by insurance portfolio, in the prospectus, the life insurance policies held by DLP IV and Life Trust “do not serve as direct collateral for the L Bonds” and have been “pledged as direct collateral securing” other debt obligations senior to L Bond investors.
GWG bonds are “auto-renewable.” Like a magazine subscription, unless an L bond investor gives notice ahead of the maturity date that they wish to redeem their investment, the bond is renewed automatically and replaced with a new one with the same terms and interest rate then being offered by GWG. This feature forces investors to be vigilant as expiration approaches.
GWG bonds are unlisted. This means the bonds are not tradable on any stock exchange. Because there is no market for the L Bonds there is no way for an investor to regularly gauge the value of an L Bonds or the credit worthiness of GWG based on market sentiment.
GWG bonds are not rated. L Bonds were not credit rated by any credit rating agency nor were they insured.

Advisor Thomas Martin Has Unsuitable Investment Complaints

October 2, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating BrokerCheck records reports that financial advisor Thomas S. Martin (Martin), currently employed by Brighton Securities Corp. (Brighton Securities) has been subject to at least two customer complaints during the course of his career. According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Mr. Martin’s customer complaints alleges that Mr. Martin recommended unsuitable investments in various investments securities, among other allegations of misconduct relating to the handling of their accounts.

In January 2020, Mr. Martin was the subject of a regulatory action initiated by FINRA. Mr. Martin consented to the findings and sanctions, of $5,000 in civil and administrative penalties. Mr. Martin neither admitted or denied the findings. Mr. Martin allegedly exercised discretion in customers’ accounts, without prior written authorization from the customers. Additionally, Mr. Martin received written reprimands from his firm, for engaging in such conduct.

In August 2017, a customer complained that Mr. Martin violated the securities laws by alleging that Mr. Martin engaged in unauthorized trading between February 2017 and July 2017. The claim settled in the amount of $8,252.75.

In August 2011, a customer complained that Mr. Martin violated the securities laws by alleging that Mr. Martin engaged in unsuitable investment advice, with regards to the customer’s IRA. Client claimed she deposited money into her IRA with instructions to be placed in the safest account. The IRA is alleged to have lost approximately $7,000, resulting in this customer dispute. The claim settled in the amount of $22,407.33.

Shawn Good Barred Over Alleged Ponzi Scheme – Investor Recovery Options

October 1, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are currently investigating claims that advisor Shawn Good (Good) has been accused by clients and regulators of engaging in fraudulent investment activities including undisclosed outside business activities (OBAs) and a ponzi scheme. According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Good was employed by Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLC (Morgan Stanley) at the time of the activity. If you have been a victim of Good’s alleged misconduct our firm may be able to assist you in recovering funds.

On April 18, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed an emergency action and charged Good with defrauding clients and misappropriating millions of dollars of investor funds. The SEC alleges that Good engaged in a multi-year Ponzi scheme involving his clients at Morgan Stanley. Good is alleged to have defrauded his clients – novice investors who trusted him, including retirees and a single mother of young children – of at least $4.8 million. Beginning in or about December 2012 through at least February 2022, the SEC claims that Good solicited five Morgan Stanley clients to make supposed investments by transferring funds from firm accounts to his personal bank account. Good then is alleged to have solicited the clients to transfer the funds to his personal account to make low-risk investments in real-estate development projects and tax-free government bonds. It is alleged that in fact those funds were used to repay earlier victims and also to pay Good’s personal expenses, such as payments towards his Tesla, over $800,000 in credit-card bills, and Venmo transfers. The SEC claims that Good invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to virtually every question when confronted with his actions.

Newbridge Advisor Dean Norwalk Subject to Customer Disputes

September 25, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating BrokerCheck records reports that Dean Robert Nowak (Nowak), currently employed by Newbridge Securities Corporation (Newbridge), has been subject to at least three customer complaints in his career. According to records kept by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Nowak’s customer complaint alleges that Nowak made misrepresentations with respect to securities transactions to customers.

In April 2020, a customer complained that Nowak violated the securities laws by alleging that Nowak engaged in unsuitable investment practices and made misrepresentations and omissions regarding the features and risks of a fixed annuity and a real estate trust, including restrictions on liquidity and the applicable time horizon. The claim alleges $100,000 in damages and is currently pending.

Broker Douglas Schmitz Has Customer Complaints

September 25, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating BrokerCheck records reports that broker Douglas Gene Schmitz (Schmitz), currently employed by Classic, LLC (Classic) has been subject to at least three customer complaints during the course of his career. According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Schmitz’s customer complaints alleges that Schmitz engaged in misconduct relating to the handling of their accounts, including lack of fiduciary responsibility.

In August 2020, a customer complained that Schmitz violated the securities laws by alleging that Schmitz engaged in lack of fiduciary responsibility. The claim alleges $40,000 in damages and is currently pending.

In July 2020, a customer complained that Schmitz violated the securities laws by alleging that Schmitz did not follow direction to liquidate the customer’s account. The damage amount requested was $5,200. The claim was closed-no action.

In April 2020, a customer complained that Schmitz violated the securities laws by alleging that Schmitz engaged in a trade execution failure. The damage amount requested was $750,000. The claim settled in the amount of $275,000.

Arkadios Advisor Mark Reffett Accused of Unsuitable Investment Practices

September 21, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating BrokerCheck records reports that Mark Alexander Reffett (Reffett), currently employed by Arkadios Capital, has been subject to at least one customer complaint his career. According to records kept by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Reffett’s customer complaint alleges that Reffett engaged in unsuitable investment strategy and alternative investments.

In May 2020, a customer complained that Reffett violated the securities laws by alleging that Reffett engaged in unsuitable investment strategy and alternative investments beginning in 2014 and continuing to 2016. The claim alleges $1,575,881 in damages and is currently pending.

Alternative investments include a class of products including DDPs such as non-traded REITs, oil and gas offerings, equipment leasing products, and other alternative investments. These alternative investments virtually never profit investors and are almost always unsuitable for investors because of their high fee and cost structure. Brokers selling these products are paid additional commission in order to hype these inferior quality investments providing a perverse incentives to create an artificial market for the investments.

Several studies have confirmed that Non-traded REITs underperform publicly traded REITs with some showing that Non-Traded REITs cannot even beat safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds. Brokers selling these products must disclose to the investor that non-traded REITs provide lower investment returns than treasuries while being high risk and illiquid – but almost never do. Because investors are not compensated with additional return in exchange for higher risk and illiquidity, these kinds of alternative investment products are rarely, if ever, appropriate for investors. Continue Reading

Advisor Michael Martino Subject to Multiple Unsuitable Advice Disputes

September 21, 2022 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating BrokerCheck records reports that broker Michael Christopher Martino (Martino), currently employed by Four Points Capital Partners LLC (Four Points Capital Partners) has been subject to at least six customer complaints during the course of his career. According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Martino’s customer complaints alleges that Martino recommended unsuitable investments in various investments among other allegations of misconduct relating to the handling of their accounts, including fraud and misrepresentation.

In June 2020, a customer complained that Martino violated the securities laws by alleging that Martino engaged in unsuitable investment advice involving unsuitable concentrations, along with unreasonable commissions. The complaint also alleged that Martino failed to know the customer. The claim alleges $543,163 in damages and is currently pending.

In February 2020, a customer complained that Martino violated the securities laws by alleging that Martino engaged in mismanagement of customer accounts. The claim alleges $107,038 in damages and is currently pending.

In January 2020, a customer complained that Martino violated the securities laws by alleging that Martino provided poor advice which caused the customer losses. The damage amount requested was $200,000. The claim settled in the amount of $14,900.

In January 2014, a customer complained that Martino violated the securities laws by alleging that Martino engaged in unsuitable investment advice. The damage amount requested was $100,000. The claim settled in the amount of $14,500.