Securities Lawyers Blog

Broker Ralph Fetrow Discharged Over Allegations of Outside Business Activities

December 7, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm is investigating claims made by Castleview Partners, LLC (Castleview Partners) when the firm terminated broker Ralph Fetrow (Fetrow). According to the firm, Fetrow was discharged in September 2016 after allegation were made that Fetrow violated firm policies and was under investigation for possible violations of firm policies and procedures prohibiting trading away and outside business activities.

According to Fetrow’s brokercheck records Fetrow disclosed outside business activities including Painted Hill Farms, Financial Planning Association, Shippensburg University, RAMS 88 Inc, and Ralph Fetrow Consulting. At this time it is unclear whether the allegations stem from one of these disclosed entities or another business practice. 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”. Often times brokers who engage in this practice use outside businesses in order to market their securities.

Fetrow entered the securities industry in 1999. From October 2008 through December 2015 Fetrow was associated with Invest Financial Corporation. Since February 2016, Fetrow has been registered with Kovack Securities Inc. out of the firm’s Lemoyne, Pennsylvania office location.

New York Times Investigates Broker Walter Marino’s Annuity Sales

December 7, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm’s investment attorneys are investigating reports in a New York Times article and customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Walter Marino (Marino) currently associated with Benjamin Securities, Inc. (Benjamin Securities) alleging unsuitable recommendations to invest in variable products such as variable annuities and equity indexed annuities. According to brokercheck records Marino has been subject to seven customer complaints and three employment separations for cause.

According to the New York Times, Marino solicited teachers to invest in high cost low quality annuities with their retirement savings. The Legend Group was alleged to be the provider of the investments all these teachers held. The firm fired Marino on grounds other than the investment fee issue. According to Marino’s brokercheck records the cause of the separation was that Marino represented to the firm that an annuity investment was not a replacement when in fact the firm determined it was. Legend has stated that their investments and charges “were consistent with the firm’s policies.”

Variable annuities and equity indexed annuities are complex financial and insurance products. In fact, recently the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a publication entitled: Variable Annuities: What You Should Know encouraging investors to ask questions about the variable annuity before investing. Essentially, a variable annuity is a contract with an insurance company under which the insurer agrees to make periodic payments to you. The investor chooses the investments made in the annuity and value of your variable annuity will vary depending on the performance of the investment options chosen. The primary benefits of variable annuities are the death benefit and tax deferment of investment gains.

Financial Advisor Guy Deemer Subject to Multiple Regulatory Actions

December 5, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against financial advisor Guy Deemer (Deemer) currently registered with IFS Securities, alleging excessive trading or churning and unauthorized trading among other claims. According to brokercheck records Deemer has been subject to six customer complaints, two regulatory actions, and one employment termination for cause.

In September 2015 Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. (Oppenheimer) terminated Deemer after alleging that he failed to follow management’s directions when he failed to move accounts from transaction based to fee based.

In July 2014 a customer filed a complaint alleging excessive trading activity from July 2009 through December 2013. The customer alleged $300,000 in damages. The claim was settled for $115,000.

TradingBlock Financial Advisor Joshua Arnold Subject to Multiple Customer Complaints

December 5, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against financial advisor Joshua Arnold (Arnold) currently registered with TradingBlock, alleging negligence, unsuitable recommendations, negligent supervision, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract among other claims. According to brokercheck records Arnold has been subject to ten customer complaints and three regulatory actions.

In September 2016 a customer filed a complaint alleging negligence and unsuitable recommendations that caused $250,000 in damages. The broker denied all claims. The claim is current pending.

In November 2015 another customer filed a complaint that Arnold failed to handle the account properly causing a tax penalty. The claim was resolved for $37,500.

Financial Advisor John Crook Subject to a $4.8 Million Customer Complaint

December 3, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against financial advisor John Crook (Crook) currently registered with Prospera Financial Services, Inc. (Prospera), alleging unsuitable investments, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, churning, and unauthorized trading among other claims. According to brokercheck records Crook has been subject to two customer complaints and one employment separation for cause.

In July 2015 Crook was discharged by Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (Raymond James) after the firm stated that it lost confidence in Crook after an internal review into a client compliant lead the firm to believe that Crook did not provide plausible explanations to the investigation.

In August 2016 a customer filed $4.8 million complaint involving Crook’s conduct and alleging violations of the securities law. The claim is still pending.

Broker Investigation: Victor Lambert

December 2, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against financial advisor Victor Lambert (Lambert) currently not registered with any firm, alleging unsuitable investments among other claims. According to brokercheck records Lambert has been subject to seven customer complaints and two judgement/liens.

In January 2016 Lambert disclosed a tax lien of $46,706. A broker’s inability to handle their personal finances has also been found to be relevant in helping investors determine if they should allow the broker to handle their finances.

In October 2015 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Lambert purchased two equities that were inappropriate for the client causing damages. The claim was resolved for $85,000.

Broker Raymond Harrison Has Complaints Over Non-Traded REITs

November 30, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Raymond Harrison (Harrison) currently associated with Cambridge Investment Research, Inc. (Cambridge) alleging unsuitable investments , lack of due diligence, lack of supervision, and omissions of material information among other claims. According to brokercheck records Harrison has been subject to six customer complaints and two financial disclosures. Many of the complaints involve direct participation products (DPPs) such as non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), equipment leasing funds – such as LEAF or ICON, and other alternative investments.

In October 2016 a customer filed a complaint alleging unsuitable investments for investment experience and risk tolerance, lack of adequate due diligence in regard to investments, a lack of supervision and the omission of material information. The customer claimed damages of $603,000. The claim is currently pending.

Our firm has represented many clients in illiquid alternative investments products. All of these investments come with high costs and have historically underperformed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds. For example, products like oil and gas partnerships, REITs, and other alternative investments are only appropriate for a narrow band of investors under certain conditions due to the high costs, illiquidity, and huge redemption charges of the products, if they can be redeemed at all. However, due to the high commissions brokers earn on these products they sell them to investors who cannot profit from them and have created a large market for a failed product. Further, investor often fail to understand that they have lost money in these illiquid investments until many years after investing. In sum, for all of their costs and risks, investors in these programs are in no way additionally compensated for the loss of liquidity, risks, or cost.

Customers Complain About Broker Joseph Zastrow’s Annuity Practices

November 30, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm’s investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Joseph Zastrow (Zastrow) currently associated with Thrivent Investment Management Inc. (Thrivent) alleging unsuitable recommendations to invest in variable products such as variable annuities, equity indexed annuities, and variable life insurance. According to brokercheck records Zastrow has been subject to six customer complaints and one criminal matter.

In August 2016 a customer alleged that Zastrow failed to provide the customer with disclosures about the variable annuity contract or provide suitability information in July 2015. The customer also alleged that his signature was forged on documents dated May 2015. The customer claimed $2,956.67 in damages and was granted $2,861.98.

Variable annuities and equity indexed annuities are complex financial and insurance products. In fact, recently the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a publication entitled: Variable Annuities: What You Should Know encouraging investors to ask questions about the variable annuity before investing. Essentially, a variable annuity is a contract with an insurance company under which the insurer agrees to make periodic payments to you. The investor chooses the investments made in the annuity and value of your variable annuity will vary depending on the performance of the investment options chosen. The primary benefits of variable annuities are the death benefit and tax deferment of investment gains.

Oil Linked Investments Loss Recovery – iPath S&P GSCI Crude Oil Total Return Index ETN (OIL) and VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil ETN (UWTI)

November 29, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm is investigating potential securities claims against brokerage firms for sales practice violations 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.

One investment that advisors may be recommending to clients in order to gain exposure to oil is the iPath S&P GSCI Crude Oil Total Return Index ETN (Symbol: OIL). OIL is a speculative ETN that attempts to “reflect[] the returns that are potentially available through an unleveraged investment in the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil futures contract.” Brokers may be recommending OIL for long-term holding when, in fact, OIL is a risky ETN that is only appropriate for short-term investment speculation on the price direction of oil.

As Morningstar has written, “Due to the extremely specialized exposure of the fund, investors should only consider it for a small position in the satellite portion of a broadly diversified portfolio.” MorningStar also explained how the futures invested in the fund make the investment inappropriate for long-term holdings and how the price of the fund is not related to the price of oil. “For example, in 2013 OIL increased 5.6%, close to WTI’s spot price gain of 6.9% for the year. However, over the trailing five-year period OIL lost 1% annualized, compared with an annualized gain of more than 20% for spot WTI over the same period.”

Massachusetts Files Complaint Against Morgan Stanley Alleging Unfair Sales Contests to Sell Securities Backed Loans

November 29, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm has previously reported on the growing trend of brokerage firms recommending non-purpose loans secured by their brokerage accounts to clients. See Investors Risk Big Losses with Loans Secured by Securities Collateral Accounts. Recently, the state of Massachusetts charged Morgan Stanley with conducting unethical – high-pressure – sales contests among its financial advisers to encourage clients to take out loans. According to newsources, from January 2014 until April 2015, the firm ran two different contests involving 30 advisers in Massachusetts and Rhode Island with the express goal of persuading customers to take out securities-based loans (SBLOCs) with their securities accounts serving as collateral. Advisers were promised bonuses of $1,000 for 10 loans, $3,000 for 20 loans and $5,000 for 30 loans. The contest was alleged to have generated $24 million in new loans and was run despite an internal Morgan Stanley prohibition on such initiatives.

As a background, these lines of credit allow investors to borrow money using securities held in the investment accounts as collateral and allow the investor to continue to trade securities in the pledged accounts. An SBLOC typically requires monthly interest-only payments until repaid. Thus, when an investor losses a significant amount of their portfolio the investor has made very little progress in repaying the loan and may have few to no options to pay the loan back. Recently FINRA issued an “Investor Alert” entitled “Securities-Backed Lines of Credit – It May Pay to See Beyond the Pitch” recognizing the conflicts between brokerage firms incentivized by “SBLOCs [that] can be a key revenue source for securities firms” and those same firms “placing your financial future at greater risk.”

According to Fortune, firms such as UBS, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, and JP Morgan are recommending that their high net worth investors take out loans against their brokerage accounts at an alarming rate. The Wall Street Journal reported that securities based loans increased by 28% at UBS between 2011 and 2013. According to Fortune, a Wells Fargo advisor told the writer that the loans are so lucrative for the brokers that they refer to the money they make as their 13th production month. Another contact with Morgan Stanley reported that a regional manager would like to automatically send paperwork for loans with every single new account form.