Securities Lawyers Blog

Customers File Complaints Against Kenneth Saunders Over Alternative Investments

November 26, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Kenneth Saunders (Saunders) currently associated with National Planning Corporation (NPC) alleging unsuitable investments among other claims. According to brokercheck records Saunders has been subject to six customer complaints. Some of the complaints involve direct participation products (DPPs) such as non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs) and other alternative investments.

Saunders has also disclosed a number outside business activities including his d/b/a Saunders Investment & Tax Advisory Group, Inc., Heron Bay Association, and Parke Place HOA. The most recent customer complaint was filed in March 2016 and alleged that Saunders recommended unsuitable alternative investments causing $150,000 in damages. The claim is currently pending.

Our firm has represented many clients wo have invested in Direct Participation Products and REITS. Many of these types of investments come with high costs and have historically underperformed various benchmarks. For example, according to FINRA, products like REITs, and DPPs 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. Further, investors often fail to understand that they have lost money in these illiquid investments until many years after investing.

Centaurus Financial Broker David White Has Complaints Over Alternative Investments

November 26, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against David White (White) currently associated with Centaurus Financial, Inc. (Centaurus) alleging unsuitable investments and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims. According to brokercheck records White has been subject to eleven customer complaints. Many of the complaints involve direct participation products (DPPs) such as non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs) and other alternative investments.

Our firm has experience representing investment fraud victims with these investments against Centaurus. See Gana Weinstein LLP Wins Arbitration Award On Behalf of Client Against Centaurus Financial. In that case, the Claimant alleged that the broker involved invested over $2,000,000 in exclusively high cost products and 50% of those investments were in alternative investments such as private placements, oil and gas partnerships, and REITs. The other 50% was invested in variable and equity-indexed annuities. The panel found that “the investments Hashemian recommended while at Centaurus were not suitable and in [Claimant’s] best interests. [Claimant] also provided sufficient evidence to meet her burden of proof to support her allegations in her Statement of Claim that the actions by Hashemian, for which Centaurus is responsible, constitute fraudulent and negligently made material misrepresentations and omitted material information in the sale of the investments to [Claimant].” Award Can Be Found Here.

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.

Broker Investigation: Independent Financial Group Supervisor Michael DiGaetano

November 23, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our investment attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Michael DiGaetano (DiGaetano) currently associated with Independent Financial Group, LLC (Independent Financial) alleging unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, fraud, negligence, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims. According to brokercheck records DiGaetano has been subject to three customer complaints and one regulatory sanction.

In May 2012 FINRA sanctioned DiGaetano alleging that as a supervisor he failed in responsibilities by not taking reasonable action to prevent another broker from committing securities fraud. (FINRA No. 2009019209202) As part of the claim, FINRA alleged that DiGaetano failed to even contact customers who were subject to fraudulent mutual fund switches and never questioned the broker involved even though the trades were marked as unsolicited.

Brokers in the financial industry have the fundamental responsibility to treat investors fairly. This obligation includes making only suitable investments for their client. The suitable analysis has certain requirements that must be met before the recommendation is made. First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation for the investment based upon the broker’s and the firm’s investigation and due diligence. Common due diligence looks into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, the issuer, the likelihood of success or failure of the investment, and other relevant factors. Second, if there is a reasonable basis to recommend the product to investors the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives. These factors include the client’s age, investment experience, retirement status, long or short term goals, tax status, or any other relevant factor.

Customers Complain About Broker Alan Thomilson’s Annuity Practices

November 23, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

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

In March 2015 a customer alleged that Thomilson misrepresented a recommendation to replace an existing variable annuity with an equity indexed annuity and that the recommendation was not suitable causing $125,000 in damages. The claim is currently pending.

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.

Arkansas Sanctions Financial Advisors Raymond Adcock and Charles Ferrill Over Talon Securities Sales

November 22, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm is investigating claims made by Arkansas Securities Commissioner against brokers Raymond Adcock (Adcock) and Charles Bailey Ferrill, Jr. (Ferrill) concerning their raising of funds for a business plan to operate a hedge fund through two companies – Talon LLC created in February 2011 and Talon LP created in February 2012 (Talon Entities). (See In re Raymond Dickie Adcock, Case No. S-14-0008). Both brokers were registered with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) at the time.

Both Ferrill and Adcock were most recently registered with broker-dealer Regal Securities, Inc. (Regal), an Arkansas registered broker-dealer firm based in Glenview, Illinois. According to the State of Arkansas, while employed by Regal, Ferrill worked in the Regal office supervised by Adcock.

According to the consent order, Talon LLC served as the general partner and investment manager of Talon LP and no individuals other than Adcock and Ferrill had control over the Talon Entities at any point in time. Further, Ferrill managed the Talon Entities out of Regal’s branch location and used the same telephone and facsimile numbers as the Regal branch office to conduct Talon business. However, the Talon entities never registered with the State of Arkansas.

Broker Investigation: Network 1 Financial Securities Advisor David Lerner

November 22, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Investment attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against David Lerner (Lerner) currently associated with Network 1 Financial Securities Inc. (Network 1) alleging unsuitable investments and failure to follow instructions among other claims. According to brokercheck records Lerner has been subject to 10 customer complaints, one regulatory sanction, one employment separation for cause, and three judgments/liens.

In July 2015, Lerner received a tax lien in the amount of $16,388. Earlier in April 2015 Lerner was subject to another tax lien of $81,986. 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.

Brokers in the financial industry have the fundamental responsibility to treat investors fairly. This obligation includes making only suitable investments for their client. The suitable analysis has certain requirements that must be met before the recommendation is made. First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation for the investment based upon the broker’s and the firm’s investigation and due diligence. Common due diligence looks into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, the issuer, the likelihood of success or failure of the investment, and other relevant factors. Second, if there is a reasonable basis to recommend the product to investors the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives. These factors include the client’s age, investment experience, retirement status, long or short term goals, tax status, or any other relevant factor.

Financial Advisor Joseph Thurnherr Subject to Multiple Customer Complaints

November 21, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Investment attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Joseph Thurnherr (Thurnherr) alleging unsuitable investments, fraud, churning, breach of fiduciary duty, and unauthorized trading among other claims. According to brokercheck records Thurnherr has been subject to five customer complaints, and one judgment/lien.

In November 2014, Thurnherr received a tax lien in the amount of $27,663. 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 June 2016 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Thurnherr overconcentrated their account causing $93,624 in losses. The claim is currently pending.

SEC Charges Peter Kohli With Fraud in the Sale of DMS Funds

November 20, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm is investigating claims made by Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against broker Peter Kohli (Kohli), DMS Advisors, Inc. (DMS Advisors), and Marshad Capital Group, Inc. (Marshal). See SEC v. Peter R. Kohli, et al, (E.D. Pa.). According to the SEC, from 2012 through 2015 Kohli lied to induce over 120 investors to invest at least $3.2 million in entities owned or controlled by Kohli. Kohli was a registered representative of Trustmont Financial Group, Inc. (Trustmont) from July 2010 until May 2015 out of the firm’s Leesport, Pennsylvania office location. In April 2015 Trustmont permitted Kohli to resign for accepting loans from a client.

The SEC allged that Kohli launched the DMS Funds that consisted of four emerging markets mutual fund series. Kohli allegedly solicited his own customers and clients to invest in the funds using prospectuses and other documents that contained misrepresentations overstating DMS Funds’ sophistication and ignored key risks associated with the investments. The SEC alleged that as the fund collapsed due to Kohli’s recklessness, Kohli engaged in three other frauds in an effort to keep the funds afloat. One such alleged fraud was that Kohli made material misrepresentations in connection with the sale of warrants 10 purchase Marshad stock – an entity Kohli controlled. In addition, the SEC accused Kohli of misappropriating investor money that he solicited for the purported purpose of making investments into one of the finds and instead used the money to pay fund expenses. Finally, the SEC accused Kohli of lieing to investozs in connection with the sale of Marshad promissory notes in a desperate attempt to raise money to cover fund expenses and delay the DMS Funds’ collapse.

According to Kohli’s brokercheck records Kohli was permitted by Trustmont to engage in DMS Financial, Inc. and DMS Funds. 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”.

Broker John Cangialosi Sanctioned by Multiple Regulators

November 18, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Investment attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against John Cangialosi (Cangialosi) alleging unsuitable investments, fraudulent and negligent acts, breach of contractual requirements, churning, and negligent misrepresentation among other claims. According to brokercheck records Cangialosi has been subject to five customer complaints, two financial disclosure – one bankruptcy and one tax liens, one employment separation for cause, and two regulatory events.

In April 2013, FINRA found that Cangialosi violated FINRA rules that require the timely disclosure judgments or liens. In this case FINRA found that Cangialosi failed to timely disclose six liens and fined him $5,000 and suspended Cangialosi for three months. In January 2016 the state of Michigan denied Cangialosi’s application to engage in securities business in the state on the grounds that Cangialosi engaged in dishonest and unethical practices within the last 10 years supporting the denial of his registration application.

In 2009 J.P. Turner & Company, LLC permitted Cangialosi to resign after allegations were made that the broker engaged in unauthorized trading in a client’s account.

Broker Investigation: Customer Complaints Against Advisor Christian Herrera

November 18, 2016 | by Staff Attorney

Attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Christian Herrera (Herrera) alleging unsuitable investments and unauthorized trading among other claims. According to brokercheck records Herrera has been subject to five customer complaints, one financial disclosure – a bankruptcy, and one regulatory event.

A customer filed a complaint in October 2013 alleging that the broker made unsuitable recommendations by over-concentrating their leading to $39,229 in losses. The claim was settled for $14,000.

Brokers in the financial industry have the fundamental responsibility to treat investors fairly. This obligation includes making only suitable investments for their client. The suitable analysis has certain requirements that must be met before the recommendation is made. First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation for the investment based upon the broker’s and the firm’s investigation and due diligence. Common due diligence looks into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, the issuer, the likelihood of success or failure of the investment, and other relevant factors. Second, if there is a reasonable basis to recommend the product to investors the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives. These factors include the client’s age, investment experience, retirement status, long or short term goals, tax status, or any other relevant factor.