Bb & t Securities

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Matthias O’meara (O’meara), previously associated with BB & T Securities, LLC, has at least one disclosable event. These events include one regulatory, alleging that O’meara recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a pending customer complaint on October 15, 2024.

The Securities and Exchange Commission deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Choice Advisors, LLC (‘Choice’) and Matthias O’Meara (collectively Respondents). The Divison of Enforcement alleges that on September 22, 2021, the Commission filed a Complaint against Choice and O’Meara in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California in a civil action entitled Securities and Exchange Commission v. Choice Advisors, LLC and Matthias O’Meara,Case No. 21-cv-01669. The Complaint alleged that in May 2018, O’Meara left his employment at a national municipal underwriting firm to start Choice, a new municipal advisor focused on charter schools. While O’Meara was in the process of leaving the underwriting firm, he entered into an impermissible fee-splitting arrangement with the firm, by making an agreement for Choice to split the underwriter’s fees for upcoming bonds involving Choice’s municipal advisory clients. O’Meara then proceeded to improperly operate in a dual capacity with respect to two charter school clients, simultaneously acting as a registered representative for the underwriting firm, and also as a municipal advisor purporting to serve as his two clients’ fiduciary. Moreover, Choice and O’Meara unlawfully engaged in municipal advisory activities when Choice was not registered with the Commission or the MSRB. O’Meara and Choice then failed to disclose to their clients the conflicts of interest created by O’Meara’s dual role and by Choice’s unregistered status. The Complaint alleged that this misconduct violated the federal securities laws, including violations by both Respondents of Sections 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act and MSRB Rules G-17 and G-42, and further violations by Choice of Section 15B(a)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act and MSRB Rule A-12. On April 15, 2024, the Court granting the Commission summary judgment on six of its claims, and denying Choice and O’Meara’s motion in its entirety. Specifically, the Court found that Respondents breached their fiduciary duties to their clients by failing to disclose their unregistered status and O’Meara’s simultaneous employment with the underwriting firm and Choice, in violation of Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act and MSRB Rule G-42. The Court also ruled that Respondents’ impermissible fee-splitting arrangement with the underwriting firm violated MSRB Rule G-42. The Court further held that Respondents violated MSRB Rule G-17 by failing to deal fairly with their clients. In addition, the Court ruled that Respondents unlawfully engaged in unregistered municipal advisory activity, and that Choice failed to register with the Commission and the MSRB in violation of Section 15B(a)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act and MSRB Rule A-12. Additionally, the Court found that Respondents’ violations of the MSRB rules constituted violations of Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act’s prohibition against engaging in municipal advisory activity in contravention of any MSRB rule. On September 24, 2024, as amended October 7, 2024, the Court entered a final judgment against Choice and O’Meara. Among other things, the final judgment permanently enjoined Choice and O’Meara from future violations of Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act, and MSRB Rules G-17 and G-42. The final judgment further permanently enjoined Choice from future violations of Section 15B(a)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act and MSRB Rule A-12. The final judgment also imposed the following monetary remedies: O’Meara, disgorgement in the amount of $133,149 and prejudgment interest in the amount of $45,932; Choice, disgorgement in the amount of $79,889 and prejudgment interest in the amount of $27,559; O’Meara, a civil penalty of $133,149; and Choice, a civil penalty of $79,889.

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Michael Braun (Braun), previously associated with Bb & t Securities, LLC, has at least one disclosable event. These events include one tax lien, alleging that Braun recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on October 24, 2024.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (‘Commission’) deems it appropriate and in the\<char_lb_r>\, public interest that public administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Hamlin Capital Advisors, LLC (Hamlin Advisors) and Michael Ferrell Braun (together, Respondents). In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondents have submitted Offers of Settlement which the Commission has determined to accept. The Commission finds that this matter concerns failures to timely and fully disclose material conflicts of interest and related violations by Hamlin Advisors, a registered municipal advisor, and its associated person and Managing Director, Braun, including violations of various Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (‘MSRB’) rules by each Respondent, and related breaches of fiduciary duty by Hamlin Advisors with respect to its disclosure violations. From September 2017 to at least April 2022 (the ‘Relevant Period’), Hamlin Advisors and Braun provided advice to certain charter schools (directly or indirectly through related borrower entities) (collectively, the ‘Charter School Clients’) on the issuance of municipal bond offerings totaling over $500 million in aggregate principal amount. In each of these issuances, Hamlin Advisors’s affiliate, a registered investment adviser (‘Hamlin Affiliate’), purchased either all or a substantial portion of the offered bonds. In most instances, Hamlin Affiliate also acted as compensated bondholder representative. This affiliate relationship created a material conflict of interest which was not timely disclosed to the Charter School Clients until several days or sometimes weeks after Hamlin Advisors began advising on the structure, timing, and terms of the particular offerings at issue. Braun provided the advice to the Charter School Clients and was responsible for providing the conflicts disclosure and the agreements for municipal advisory services. When Hamlin Advisors and Braun did disclose that a material conflict of interest existed because of Hamlin Advisors’s affiliation with Hamlin Affiliate, the disclosure was inadequate because it only disclosed that the firms had certain common ownership and both firms could ‘receive fees.’ It did not disclose that Hamlin Advisors had a financial incentive that was opposed to the interests of the Charter School Clients, due to its affiliation with the Hamlin Affiliate. Further, Hamlin Advisors’s disclosure was inadequate because it did not adequately describe the nature, implications, and potential consequences of the conflict, and did not disclose how it planned to manage and mitigate the conflict. In addition, in their advisory agreements with the Charter School Clients, Hamlin Advisors and Braun did not accurately describe the scope of Hamlin Advisors’s municipal advisory services for the deals at\<char_lb_r>\, issue. Finally, Hamlin Advisors’s written supervisory procedures were not\<char_lb_r>\, reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the applicable securities laws and regulations, including the applicable MSRB rules. As a result of the conduct described herein, Respondents violated Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act (prohibiting violations of MSRB Rules), and MSRB Rules G-17 and G-42 and Hamlin Advisors violated Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Action (fiduciary duty) and MSRB Rule G-44.

Articles Tagged with Bb & t Securities

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Matthias O’meara in Firm BB & T Securities, LLC

There are Recent Customer Complaints with Broker Michael Braun in Firm Bb & t Securities, LLC